Me7 Tslxemwílc-kt es Secwepemctsném-kt!
Secwépemc Language Resource Development For Little Fawn Nursery – An Early Years Language Immersion Program
by Jessica Arnouse
B.A., Simon Fraser University, 2007
Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts
in the Department of Linguistics Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
© Jessica Arnouse 2019 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Spring 2019
Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation. Approval
Name: Jessica Arnouse Degree: Master of Arts Title: Me7 Tslxemwílc-kt es Secwepemctsném-kt! Secwépemc Language Resource Development for Little Fawn Nursery – An Early Years Language Immersion Program Examining Committee: Chair: Nancy Hedberg Professor
Marianne Ignace Senior Supervisor Professor
______
John Lyon
Supervisor Assistant Professor California State University, Fresno
______
Date Approved: April 17, 2019
ii Ethics Statement
iii Abstract
This is a linguistic study of novice adult language learners when producing speech within an early years immersion program. The study reflects the unique language knowledge of individuals and provides a description of supportive measures for mentoring purposes through the guidance of first language speakers of the Secwepemc language. In a community of limited access to first language speakers, this research study focused on training novice adult language learners about multi-media language learning resources and second-language acquisition teaching strategies to keep young children engaged in activities. The participants used Smart Board technology, hands-on training and the mentor-apprentice model to stay in the language. The study combined experiential ways of learning with innovative technology to mobilize adult speakers at the Little Fawn Nursery language domain within the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc community.
Keywords: Secwépemc language revitalization; early childhood education; Little Fawn Nursery; Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc
iv Dedication
For my children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, great-great-grandchildren…
Mestentsút-cwiye wel me7 yews.
v Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge all the fluent Secwépemc language speakers for their courageous efforts in keeping our language alive, especially Bernadette Dodson (Jules), Loretta Seymour, and Mona Jules. Bernadette and Loretta for being my language mentors over the past seven years. Bernadette, for being so patient, kind, always willing to share her knowledge, and repeating words and sentences over and over. Loretta, for sharing her stories and time, and coming up with the words we could not remember or find in our dictionaries and word lists. Mona, for lighting the way by teaching to me my first Secwépemc words and phrases at the Simon Fraser University – Kamloops Campus. By persistently speaking our beautiful language, I cannot thank you all enough for mending the hole in my heart that I didn’t even know existed.
I set aside a special acknowledgement to Dr. Marianne Ignace for her encouragement, advice and tireless work for Indigenous languages – especially for the SFU Kamloops Campus where I began my educational journey. Also, I am truly grateful to Marianne, John Lyon, and Colleen Seymour for taking the time to read my paper and for giving me advice and feedback.
I acknowledge the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc Chief and Council and community leaders for their continuous support in the language reclamation, revitalization and retention efforts at Little Fawn Nursery. All are true visionaries by taking one more step forward to achieve the dream of creating more speakers of the Secwépemc language and providing a language domain for children.
I want to thank my children Ashton, Shaylin and Payton for always understanding when I had to study and didn’t take the time to participate in their activities. To my grandson, Benjamin, who I hope will become a language speaker. And to my husband, Jeff, for always understanding my aspirations and taking care of our family while I was away at school or studying. Last but not least, I want to thank my mother and mother-in- law for their unconditional love of our family.
vi Table of Contents
Approval ...... ii Ethics Statement...... iii Abstract ...... iv Dedication ...... v Acknowledgements ...... vi Table of Contents ...... vii List of Tables ...... x List of Figures ...... xi List of Acronyms ...... xii Preface ...... xiii
Chapter 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Personal Connection to Topic ...... 1 1.2. L1 Speakers - Bernadette and Loretta ...... 3 1.2.1. Biography: Loretta Seymour ...... 3 1.2.2. Biography: Bernadette Dodson (Jules) ...... 4 1.3. Link to Early Childhood Education ...... 6 1.4. Effects of Language Loss ...... 7 1.5. Terminology ...... 8 1.6. Research Questions ...... 9 1.7. Goals of Research Project ...... 9 1.8. Limitations of Research ...... 11
Chapter 2. Background to Current Study ...... 12 2.1. Secwépemc Curriculum Overview for the Early Years ...... 12 2.2. Literature Review ...... 12 2.2.1. Major Components to Starting/Maintaining Early Years Language Immersion Programs ...... 13 Second language acquisition research and its implications for language teaching pedagogies and program development ...... 13 Socio-cultural and cognitive factors in SLA ...... 15 Similarities in first and second language acquisition: ...... 16 Differences in first and second language acquisition: ...... 16 2.2.2. Challenges ...... 17 Successes ...... 18 2.3. Strategies Used in Language Revitalization for Adult Learners ...... 19 2.4. Making a Case for ECE Immersion Practices ...... 19 2.5. Summary ...... 20 2.6. Research Rationale ...... 21
vii Chapter 3. Research Method ...... 23 3.1. Methodology ...... 23 Community Contributions to Research ...... 23 Community Context ...... 25 Program Descriptions ...... 26 3.2. Participants ...... 27 3.2.1. Inclusion Criteria ...... 27 3.2.2. Exclusion Criteria ...... 28 3.2.3. Participant Procedures ...... 28 3.3. Data Collection Procedures (triangulation) ...... 29 3.4. Data Interpretation ...... 31 3.4.1. Indigenous Methodologies ...... 31 3.4.2. Secwepemc Ways of Knowing/Methodology ...... 31 3.5. Ethical Consideration ...... 32 3.5.1. Personal Responsibility and Preparation ...... 32 3.5.2. Obtaining Consent ...... 34 3.5.3. Participant Withdrawal ...... 34 3.5.4. Potential Benefits ...... 35 3.5.5. Potential Risks ...... 35 3.5.6. Participants Confidentiality Measures ...... 35 3.5.7. Data Stewardship Plan ...... 36 3.5.8. Giving Back ...... 36 3.5.9. Research Procedures and Methods Summary ...... 37
Chapter 4. Research Results ...... 38 4.1. Introduction ...... 38 4.2. Self-Assessment ...... 40 4.3. Classroom Talk Assessment ...... 41 4.4. Multi-Media Resources ...... 42 4.5. Video Recording Assessment ...... 46 4.5.1. Play-Doh Making Learning Centre ...... 46 4.5.2. ACTFL Inspired Speaking Evaluation for Secwepemctsín ...... 48 4.5.3. Word Count vs. Morpheme Count ...... 51 4.5.4. Prosody ...... 53 4.6. Combining the Secwépemc Early Years Curriculum and Resources ...... 54 4.6.1. Basic Structure of a Preschool Language Immersion Session ...... 55
Chapter 5. Conclusion ...... 57 5.1. Structural Support Systems ...... 58 5.1.1. Administration ...... 58 5.1.2. Licensing ...... 59
viii 5.1.3. Funding ...... 59 5.1.4. Resource development ...... 60 5.1.5. Language Teacher Training ...... 61 5.1.6. Recommendations for Little Fawn Nursery ...... 61 5.2. Way Forward – Setting up the Mentor-Apprentice Program Specific to LFN ...... 62 5.2.1. Personal Reflections ...... 63
References ...... 65
Appendix A. Classroom Talk Assessment ...... 68
Appendix B. Script: Circle Time Routine ...... 70
Appendix C. Script: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine ...... 72
Appendix D. Script: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine ...... 73
Appendix E. Script: Secwepemctsin Bingo Game ...... 74
Appendix F. Script: Secwepemctsin Memory Game ...... 75
Appendix G. Weekly Lesson Plan Template ...... 76
Appendix H. Panel Evaluation Form ...... 77
ix List of Tables
Table 1 – Five Stage Language Acquisition Process of Onkwe’honwehnéha at Six Nations ...... 40 Table 2 – Classroom Talk Assessment ...... 42 Table 3 – Work Plan: Multi-Media Resources ...... 45 Table 4 – Work Plan: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine ...... 47 Table 5 – Secwepemctsín Assessment for Play-Doh Making Activity (based on ACTFL) ...... 50 Table 6 – Word Count for Research Study ...... 52 Table 7 – Mentor-Apprentice Schedule Example ...... 62
x List of Figures
Figure 1- How output contributes to language acquisition directly ...... 15 Figure 2 – Smart Board Activity: Animals and Birds ...... 43 Figure 3 – Smart Board Activity: Kooshball Animals and Birds ...... 43 Figure 4 – Smart Board Activity: Animal Tracks ...... 44
xi List of Acronyms
ACTFL American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages BCTF British Columbia Teacher Federation FPCC First Peoples’ Cultural Council KIRS Kamloops Indian Residential School L1 First Language, native speaker of Secwepemctsín L2 Second Language, non-native speaker of Secwepemctsín SCES Secwépemc Cultural Education Society SFU Simon Fraser University SLA Second Language Acquisition TPR Total Physical Response TteS Tk’emlúps te Sécwepemc
xii Preface
We7 kénmes k stem, tá7us penhén k sllépenc swéti7-k ell swéti7 ke7 k’wséltktn.
Lleq’mentéke re7 stsmelt, lleq’mentéke re7 em7ímts, ell w7écwes k tslleq’emcítcwes te stsmelt.s re7 em7ímts.
Lleq’mentéke xwexwéyt e stselxemstés t’hé7en k ts’ílmes k sxexé7s re k’wséltktns…
T’ri7 penhén cú7tsem me7 melk’wílc tek me7 tsécwtsucwt k splulk’ws.
E xílem t’ri7, ren t’l’sqelcw nerí7 me7 w7ec ell nenwi7.
Whatever the future holds, do not forget who you are.
Teach your children, teach your children’s children, and then teach their children also.
Teach them the pride of a great people…
A time will come again when they will celebrate together with joy.
When that happens, my spirit will be there with you.
Chief Leschi, Nisqually
Translated into the Secwepemc language by Mona Jules
xiii Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1. Personal Connection to Topic
My maternal great-grandparents were fluent speakers of the Secwépemc language and raised their children in Secwepemctsín (Secwépemc Language). My maternal grandparents were raised in Secwepemctsín. They were from the lakes division of the Secwépemc territory, now known as Adams Lake Indian Band and Neskonlith Indian Band. My grandparents, Clara Adrian and Dave Edwards, had twelve children and spoke the language to their children until forced to attend the Kamloops Indian Residential School (KIRS). The children did not return home to see their family. I learned how they were taken away from their parents to live with various foster families.
My paternal grandmother is Sarah Deneault (née August) and she is from Neskonlith Indian Band. My late paternal grandfather was Alec Deneault and he was from Skeetchestn Indian Band. I have twelve paternal aunts and uncles who understand the language or speak at varying degrees. My grandmother is 96 years old and helped document Secwépemc language, culture, and history through revitalization efforts lead by Mona Jules at the Secwépemc Cultural Education Society.
Although my mother remembers hearing her grandparents speak the language, she does not speak it anymore. The language was erased from her memory as soon as she went to the KIRS. It was here that she lost her language and her family. I did not hear many stories about the KIRS growing up, but I soon understood why. I was raised in a cultural way now termed as "living off the land." However, this way of life was everyday life as we knew it, a natural environment to raise a family. We fished for salmon, hunted for deer and moose and grew a garden, annually. We went to the mountains on camping trips and picked berries. My mom preserved a lot of food.
I was raised by my mother away from Secwepemcúl'ecw (Secwépemc traditional territory) and I rarely heard Secwepemctsín. The only time I remember hearing Secwepemctsín was when I visited my paternal aunty in Chase, B.C., as a child. Our back yard was endless as we swam in the river, climbed the mountains and biked everywhere. Throughout my childhood and teens, my mom helped raise many children.
1 Now I understand why. My mom's family was taken away from her at the KIRS and even though she does not talk about it, we lost a lot as a family. By taking care of children, this was her way of reclaiming her family and I came to realize that she was trying to give us a chance at a better life by staying connected to our family, which included our homeland.
In my early twenties, I began post-secondary education at the Simon Fraser University (SFU) - Kamloops Campus. I learned about the colonial history of Canada from an Indigenous perspective. I learned about the colonial society that my grandparents and great-grandparents lived in. At the same time, I was putting together some pieces about my family history. It was like putting together a puzzle. I had bits and pieces of information about my family and was trying to figure out who my family was and where they came from. I came to realize that the colonial government system succeeded at destroying what was left of our family, our way of parenting, and our language. As I continued to piece together my puzzle, I began to have more empathy and understanding towards my grandmother's actions. Imagine living in a community with no children present?
My attendance at SFU Kamloops Campus was the starting point in reclaiming my language. At that time, I had no idea that learning the Secwépemc language would make such a huge impact in my life and my well-being. My first language teacher was Mona Jules - extremely knowledgeable, soft spoken and very patient with all the SFU students trying to fumble their way through speaking the language. After a few classes, I began to feel proud to speak the language. Since my first language class with Mona, I have taken every opportunity to continue to learn the language by taking courses, listening to elders speak, reading language learning books and making language learning resources. This has given me a good foundation of Secwepemctsín phonology, morphology and syntax. I remember thinking to myself, "if I ever become a language teacher, I want to be like Mona - patient and kind."
It only took one generation for my family to lose the language, therefore, my goal is to change this loss into a learning opportunity. I may not solve my family's dilemma, but I can help in other ways. I can role model the speaking and teaching of Secwepemctsín to those who wish to learn. I can help lift up the Secwépemc people by advocating for and raising the profile of Secwepemctsín for future generations. In
2 recognition and dedication to my mother, grandparents and generations before, it is my personal responsibility to provide opportunities for children to hear our beautiful language. This capstone project on language renewal is about the secret to speaking Secwepemctsín. It is quite simple: me7 wikt, me7 emétem, me7 xillt (see it, say it and do it).
1.2. L1 Speakers - Bernadette and Loretta
The Secwépemc Nation has less than 100 speakers of the language who were raised in the language. They acquired the language as children at home and from their parents, grandparents, and extended family. These speakers are defined as L1 speakers of Secwepemctsín and not a single one of those learners struggled in learning their first language. An L1 speaker is also known as a native speaker of a language, and is someone who is most used to or most comfortable using their native language. Bernadette Jules and Loretta Seymour are L1 speakers of Secwepemctsín because it was woven into the personal and social fabric of their identity. They both grew up thinking and interacting with family and community members of the Skeetchestn community.
1.2.1. Biography: Loretta Seymour
Loretta Seymour (née Jules) was born in Skeetchestn, one of the seventeen Secwépemc Bands of Secwepemcúl'ecw. Loretta was born on August 8, 1932 to Celina Jules and Hyacinth Jules. She is the middle child of her seven sisters and one brother. When the Indian Agents came to the reserve when she was a small child, her parents would take them up to the mountains in an attempt to hide them. However, they arrived without warning, and Loretta was found and abducted into the KIRS. Loretta only spoke Secwepemctsín when she arrived at the KIRS. Loretta's experience at the school was labour intensive and it was one of her friends who taught her how to read and write the English language. She retained her spirituality throughout her attendance at KIRS. During the summer months, Loretta went home to her parents and siblings and they would be out on the land working. She left home at the age of seventeen. She worked at the Christmas Tree Yards at Indian Point Park (located at the meeting point of the North and South Thompson Rivers) and at the Hops Farm in the Brocklehurst area of North
3 Kamloops. Loretta was cooking and cleaning at the KIRS when it closed. Her service over those years at the school provided students with a kind face during this dark time.
Loretta married Daniel Seymour of Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc. They had seven children and they also raised six other children and offered respite for numerous children throughout their time together. Loretta's resiliency and love for family helped her carry on through her life. Loretta lost her husband, her son, her daughter and grandson. She models for her family and community the endurance and the capacity we all have to grieve, but that we have a responsibility to keep moving forward and loving unconditionally - to keep living.
Loretta is well-known for her buckskin and embroidery work - gloves, moccasins, and vests. She made buckskin regalia for the Little Fawn Nursery children to use for traditional Secwépemc song and dance performances. Over the past decade and to the present, Loretta continues to pass on her knowledge of history, Secwepemc way of life and Secwepemctsín. She finds joy in attending Tk'emlúps community events, especially witnessing others being in service to each other makes her feel really good. For the past seven years, she has provided her guidance and expertise on Secwepemctsín translations, editing, recordings and providing guidance with her sister, Bernadette.
1.2.2. Biography: Bernadette Dodson (Jules)
Bernadette1 Dodson (née Jules) was born at Perry Ranch on July 19, 1942. Her father was working as a ranch hand at the time of her birth. Perry Ranch is located between Deadman’s Creek (now called Skeetchestn) and Cache Creek, B.C. She has very fond memories of her mother and father. Her father worked in various parts of Secwepemcúl’ecw, but mostly in the Kamloops and Skeetchestn area. When her father was called to another job, he would take all the family with him. They would camp outside, but most importantly, stayed together.
Hyacinth Jules and Celina John were Bernadette’s father and mother. They were both born in Deadman’s Creek. Hyacinth attended KIRS as a child, but Celina did not.
1 Published research acknowledges Bernadette as Garlene. Bernadette Dodson’s alias is Garlene Dodson. Her maiden name is Jules. She descends from the community of Skeetchestn Indian Band within the Secwépemc Nation.
4 When Celina’s aunt seen the cattle truck arriving in Deadman’s Creek to take away the children, she would saddle up the horses and hide away with Celina in the mountains for one or two weeks. Celina was the last monolingual speaker from Deadman’s Creek. She raised a lot of her grandchildren in the language and she lived until she was about ninety-four years old. Hyacinth lived well into his seventies. Bernadette has seven sisters and one brother, all born in Deadman’s Creek except for the two youngest who were born at the Royal Inland Hospital because Hyacinth happened to be working in the Pinantan area just north of Kamloops.
Being raised in Deadman’s Creek during a dark time as the children were being taken away to KIRS left devastating impacts on many families. Bernadette remembers being brought to KIRS before she turned four years old and she remained there until she was fourteen years old. The only way she retained her first language was during the summer months when the children were allowed to go home to their parents. Her mother and father only spoke Secwepemctsín when the children were home.
Bernadette has three daughters: Paula, Stacey and Margaret. She has one son named Benjamin. Bernadette enjoys visiting Paula and Benjamin in the United States where they live with their own families. She lives very close to her daughter Margaret in Skeetchestn and, therefore, spends a lot of time with her grandchildren Paul and Brandy. Stacey lives in Saskatchewan with her own family and Bernadette cannot wait to see her again one day. Bernadette has thirteen grandchildren and twelve great- grandchildren. After being married and living in the States for twenty-seven years, Bernadette returned to Skeetchestn and lived with her mom until she received her own home.
Before she became a Secwépemc language teacher for the Skeetchestn and Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc communities, Bernadette attended the Simon Fraser University Kamloops Campus. Bernadette did not teach reading and writing of the Secwépemc language when she was a language teacher at the Skeetchestn Indian Band Community School, only speaking. She took linguistics at SFU because she wanted to learn to read and write the language. She has fond memories of teaching for the TteS in the daycare, nursery, band school and high school. The children always loved drumming, singing, and stick games. She loves teaching because it is her first language and wants to pass it on, and for the younger generation to have the language.
5 Currently, Bernadette “works on the language” at Little Fawn Nursery with her older sister, Loretta Seymour, by providing translations, editing, audio recordings, video recordings, mentoring, and giving feedback to the language teachers. Secwepemctsín is her passion. She enjoys helping the communities by saying an opening prayer at meetings through Secwepemcúl’ecw. Her advice to language learners is to listen to speakers and don’t give up. The language is hard to pronounce, but practice, practice, practice and you will master it by having good listening skills.
1.3. Link to Early Childhood Education
As defined in the Language Nest Handbook and British Columbia Early Years Framework, the early years includes "children from birth to kindergarten" (2008, 5; 2). In 2012, I began managing the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc (TteS) preschool program at the Little Fawn Nursery (LFN) building. It did not take long to notice how fast a child picks up Secwepemctsín in an immersion setting. For the first couple of years, I was learning about my new role and trying to support the preschool educators with language curriculum and seeking funding to help our cause. Over the years, Rhonda J. Jules helped guide the preschool program with her love for children and endless passion for the language. We were determined to get out of the classroom and enjoy the outdoors by planning more field trips or by going on nature walks.
The biggest challenge was satisfying child care licensing requirements during outings "on the land," due to safety requirements. To provide authentic teachings to children about Secwépemc way of life and to connect our children to the language through our land the traditions must be hosted outside at harvesting locations or “on the land”. The traditions of the people occur during annual seasonal rounds – harvesting food, medicinal plants, and technology/tools. “A seasonal round consisted of five seasons, called nek’lltmicw (“recurring changes of the land”), divided into thirteen lunar months. The five seasons included early spring (snow melting), mid-to late spring (root gathering), summer (berry and high-elevation root and medicinal plant gathering), late summer to early fall (salmon season), and mid-to late fall (hunting season)” (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 195). Many key harvesting areas are within the forest, valleys, and along water ways. LFN planned ahead and recruited parent-volunteers in order to attend annual harvesting demonstrations. With ample notice and communication, a parent or family member of each child agreed to attend a field trip every month. Therefore, the
6 challenge in satisfying child care regulations helped improve parent-volunteerism at LFN.
"Children have a critical role to play in the survival of Indigenous languages… endangered languages that are deemed to be 'safe' are those that are spoken by children" (Chambers 2014, 9). Intergenerational transmission of the language is a key factor in language maintenance. Before my arrival at the TteS preschool program, I built a relationship with my language mentor, Bernadette Jules, during my work experience at the Secwépemc Cultural Education Society. Bernadette always shared her knowledge with Little Fawn Nursery staff members, children, and families. She introduced me to her older sister, Loretta Seymour, and we started work on documenting their language knowledge - the way they were raised to speak Secwepemctsín.
1.4. Effects of Language Loss
When our elders reminisce, there are memories of their parents and grandparents speaking Nɬeʔkepmxcín (Thompson), St'at'imcets (Lillooet) and Nsilxcín (Colville-Okanagan) - the neighbouring Salish language family groups. The Secwépemc Nation has reached a critical state in language loss. According to the 2018 Report on the Status of B.C. First Nations Languages, there are "2% fluent speakers, 7% semi-fluent speakers, and 11% learning the language" (First Peoples Cultural Council, 46). However, in Secwépemc People, Land and Laws, it states, "with the passing of many elders in the mid-1990s, the number of fluent speakers raised using Secwepemctsín in day-to-day communication has further eroded and now represents less than 2 per cent of the population, or fewer than 100 individuals" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 143). The majority of fluent speakers are elders (in their 60s and older) and most live in the northern and eastern Secwépemc communities. There are less than twenty fluent speakers with Secwepemctsín as their first (or birth) language in the western communities of Tk'emlúps, Skeetchestn and Bonaparte.
The TteS community has very few L1 speakers of Secwepemctsín, and not nearly enough to be actively involved with an early years language program. To begin making a serious impact for the TteS early years immersion program consisting of educators with novice speaking skills, LFN requires one (1) L1 speaker or intermediate speaker in each activity room: one for the infant/toddler room, one for the 3-5 room, and
7 one for the preschool room. In 2010, a community language survey was completed and clearly showed the support for language programming. Community leaders advised the TteS Education Department to start a language program for the children, which prompted an immersion program led by Diena Jules, Felicity Jules, and Dr. Janice D. Billy. I remember Diena telling me about her late brother, John Jules, and his advice to start a language revitalization program for the youngest children first and foremost. This advice began the 50% Secwépemc Language Immersion Program at LFN. It was defined as spending half of the day speaking only the language. The early years program took a drastic change in 2016 when TteS received funding to create more child care spaces, and included infants and toddlers. The TteS Chief and Council supported the LFN building expansion project to house all the children under one roof with the extension of a language revitalization program. By investing in the language immersion program goal, the community is able to provide a safe and nurturing space for children 0-5 years old.
1.5. Terminology
Indigenous, Native, Aboriginal, First Nations: These terms are used interchangeably to refer to the First Peoples of any nation who were on the land prior to contact with explorers and settlers from other continents and countries (i.e., New Zealand Maoris, Hawaiians of Polynesian descent, individual Canadian tribal groups such as the Secwépemc, etc.)
Heritage language, mother tongue, traditional language, ancestral language: These terms are used interchangeably to refer to the language Indigenous to the community being discussed or, more generally, to refer to Indigenous languages anywhere.
Language nest programs: These programs, which originated in Aotearoa (New Zealand) over 20 years ago, are immersion preschool childcare programs conducted entirely in the home language of an Indigenous group.
L1 speaker: This term is used to refer to the participant speaker who acquired Secwepemctsín as their first language. Secwepemctsín was learned during childhood and is the language most used. They are the native speakers of Secwepemctsín.
8 TteS (or Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc): This term is used to refer to the Secwépemc people of the Tk'emlúps Division, those who self-identify with the area's traditions, customs and family ties.
Note - The phrase "the language" is used throughout the document. It was an intentional move to centralize heritage language in the discussion by not having to identify it as such each time. If any other language (such as English) was discussed, it was made explicit. (McIvor 2004, 5).
1.6. Research Questions
1. What are the benefits of building effective language learning resources that will help prepare early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín (paired with fluent speaker mentorship for accurate pronunciation and grammar usage)?
a. What ways can an early years language immersion program most effectively design language-learning resources in a community of very few speakers?
b. How effective is the Communicative-Experiential approach for second language learning?
c. What are the benefits of using the LFN and Kindergarten-Grade One Curriculum (prepared for the Skeetchestn Community School) to improving fluency?
d. How might the teaching strategies and methodologies outlined in the LFN and Kindergarten-Grade One curriculum enhance the early childhood educators grammatical and phonological accuracy?
1.7. Goals of Research Project
First, this research study gathers linguistic research on novice adult language learners when producing speech. How does one evaluate this? More importantly, how does the researcher reflect the language knowledge and provide language benchmarks supportive measures for daily mentoring purposes? The researcher aims to measure speech production before and after the research project, with the guidance of L1
9 speakers and research study supervisor. In a community of limited access to L1 speakers, this research study uses a variety of language learning resources and teaching strategies to keep very young children engaged. The participants used Smart Board technology and hands-on training to stay in the language. The study focused on mobilizing adult speakers with the LFN language domain and combined experiential ways of learning with innovative technology (i.e. Smart Board).
Second, the study demonstrates the benefits of building effective language learning resources that will help train and prepare early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín from the experience, knowledge and view point of the L1 speakers like Bernadette and Loretta. LFN is a language domain of motivated learners and speakers dedicated to the language renewal of the Tk'emlúpsemc language variety. As shown in the 2010 Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc Language Survey, the research project is one aspect of the community's strategic goals for language revitalization. Consequently, as the project is guided by the goals and priorities of the Tk'emlúpsemc community, it aligns with the specifications of TCPS-2: Chapter 9 (Research Involving the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada).
Third, the participants were paired with L1 speakers or the researcher to work on producing speech based on the following Secwepemctsín grammar topics:
. "reduplication: "doubling" of individual consonants or all or part of the root of a word to express a plural, a collectivity, a quality or state, or a diminutive . spatial deixis: demonstratives dealing with the way a language expresses a speaker's orientation to spatial reference points and relations like 'here' and 'there' or 'this one' and 'that one' . pronoun marking: words or particles that refer to persons or things (e.g. he, it, we, us, you, I, and me) without mentioning them by name attached to an action word (verb), quality word, or noun… pronoun endings are categorized into transitive or intransitive, and which one is used depends on whether or not there is a recipient of the action . evidentials: particle words indicating the status of evidence of an utterance . lexical suffixes: particle words that refer to mental images invoking something's shape or kind of features" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 135-143).
10 Consequently, the LFN educators became the role models of Secwepemctsín resilience and continuity. This is an invaluable contribution to developing a strong sense of identity early in a child's life.
Finally, the research study produces a resource list of language learning resources. In combination with the above research goals, appropriate resources for the early years is essential for LFN to maintain the language within a severely endangered language community. The resources help novice learners with a starting point for producing speech for children who are learning Secwepemctsín as a second language.
1.8. Limitations of Research
This research study does not aim to evaluate other Indigenous language nest programs or language immersion programs, as each language revitalization program is unique to the community's dynamics, history and experiences. The researcher does not think it is respectful to provide an evaluation on other language programs or deem it necessary. All Indigenous language immersion programs are admired and looked at for inspiration and as models for success and achievement.
There is very limited linguistic research on Secwépemc language immersion for the early years. This area of study has room to grow and is limited to statements about second language acquisition strategies for children in a normal range of language development. The research will not address language acquisition for children with learning disabilities.
11 Chapter 2. Background to Current Study
2.1. Secwépemc Curriculum Overview for the Early Years
Skeetchestn, one of the seventeen Secwépemc communities, is about fifty-five kilometres away from the TteS community to the west. Both communities are closely related by language variety and kinship. The Secwepemctsín Kindergarten to Grade One Curriculum considers "the emergent nature of cognitive and intellectual skills among young students, and also to reflect the development nature of language acquisition" (Ignace 2009, 9). The Language Nest Handbook for B.C. First Nations Communities was written with support of the Chief Atahm School "for their longstanding commitment to their language… through the sharing of valuable experience and resources… and input of the administrators of Cseyesten Language Nest" (First Peoples Cultural Council 2014, 2). The Chief Atahm School and Cseyestn Language Nest is located at the Adams Lake Indian Band, which is about fifty-five kilometres away from the TteS community to the east. In 2012, Dr. Janice D. Billy drafted the Little Fawn Nursery Curriculum designed for the TteS community's preschool language immersion program. It is safe to say that all three programs are second language school programs where the children are inundated with English outside of the language domain and are working toward the same goal of language renewal. The study aims to combine the language renewal efforts of the three Secwépemc curriculum mentioned above to address the research goals.
2.2. Literature Review
The literature review includes documented research on theoretical and practical aspects of second language learning, teaching and resource development for the early years. Research-based sources frame the relevance of the research study; however, Indigenous voices are included and range from academics to Elders. In reviewing the literature, the researcher focused on speech producing factors as it relates to the adult beginner speakers (i.e. yecwmínme7 or care takers).
12 2.2.1. Major Components to Starting/Maintaining Early Years Language Immersion Programs
Second language acquisition research and its implications for language teaching pedagogies and program development
From birth, a child is acquiring a first language (L1 acquisition) and this is the language spoken by the immediate care giver. Prior to the arrival of English or French speaking settlers, Secwépemc caregivers were the mothers, the grandmothers, and mother's sisters and communicated "care taker speech" (Krashen 1982, 20) to the child. Over the decades, the intergenerational transmission of Secwepemctsín eroded and became subjected to "linguicide" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 143). As for the Secwépemc Nation, there is one remaining generation that remembers their parents and grandparents only speaking Secwepemctsín - "birth speakers" (Twitchell 2016, 1). This generation is made up of L1 elders in their 70s and above. Now, Secwepemctsín is learned through second language acquisition (L2 acquisition; SLA) and mostly takes place in school or classroom settings. Over the last 20 years, Indigenous language teachers and advocates deem the most successful models of revitalizing an Indigenous language as the Maori and Hawaii 'language nest' programs, an early childhood total immersion program exclusively using the traditional language as the vehicle for interaction and instruction" (McIvor 2004, 26).
SLA research is a branch of applied linguistics and has many positive implications for language teaching pedagogies and program development. The SLA research helps to provide a framework and reasoning for the development of Indigenous language teacher programs. Universities recognize Indigenous languages and are working with communities to develop accredited language programs. Not only does this help train more teachers, but also helps to raise the profile of Indigenous languages within the main stream and provides a forum for Indigenous scholars to provide a voice in SLA research. There are many Indigenous languages with limited SLA research, and Secwepemctsín is one of them. There is room to grow and room for Secwépemc scholars to provide research for program development. Green's research study about "reversing language shift is to create speakers of the target language by uncovering the path to expediently creating a critical mass of second language speakers" (2017, 9) confirms that the Rotinonhsyón:nih Language must implement an adult immersion program where the learners will acquire 3,600 hours of language in 4 years of full time
13 study. Green's research is invaluable to other Indigenous communities, as many are marginalized or lack the funding, especially for language teachers and advocates in mobilizing speakers. His research can help mobilize and advance adult immersion programs.
There is a growing early years language revitalization movement within Secwépemc communities, which was led by the Chief Atahm School and Cseyestn Language Nest programs in 1980s. The teaching pedagogies of Chief Atahm School assisted with the program development of Little Fawn Nursery's language immersion preschool program. The greatest barrier for LFN's language revitalization plan was attracting potential educators to begin learning Secwepemctsín "on the job." LFN overcame this barrier and now employs full time educators who plan to use the eight or more hours per day to sing and speak (or learn to speak in some cases) to the children. Due to the very young age of the children who attend LFN, educators use a variety of language teaching pedagogies. By combining the three early years curricula (LFN Preschool Program Curriculum, Skeetchestn Indian Band Community School, and Language Nest Handbook), LFN implemented comprehensible-input based methods such as the Berlitz Method and Total Physical Response (TPR). “At the heart of the Berlitz Method are two principles: only the target language is used in the classroom and question/answer sets are used between the teacher and student, and thus enhances communicative abilities in the language” (Ignace 2009, 13). “The TPR approach, developed by Dr. James Asher and others, is a right-brained approach to second language learning, which uses commands in the target language combined with physical actions to instill listening skills in students… it is based on the concept that language learning can be greatly accelerated through the use of body movement” (Ignace 2009, 34).
In Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition, Krashen explains the relationship between second language teaching practice, what is known about the process of second language acquisition and confirms "the superiority of comprehensible- input based methods" and through subsequent research "that we acquire vocabulary best through comprehensible input" (1982, preface). “CCI involves practical, teacher- fronted activities with visuals, pictures and props to teach and practice small chunks of vocabulary” (Ignace 2009, 42). Krashen states that, “conversation is not in itself the causative variable in second-language acquisition. It is one way, and a very good way,
14 to obtain input” (1982, 61). As novice speakers of Secwepemctsín, the research participants obtained input, therefore, the goal of producing accurate speech contributed to their language acquisition and provided one way of assessing how much Secwépemc language knowledge they attained. CCI is achieved through the Berlitz and TPR teaching methods according to the recommendations of the Skeetchestn curriculum for Kindergarten learners.
Figure 1- How output contributes to language acquisition directly
Comprehensible input is responsible for progress in language acquisition.
Output is possible as a result of acquired competence.
When performers speak, they encourage input (people speak to them). This is conversation. (Krashen 1982, 61)
Socio-cultural and cognitive factors in SLA
Increasing adult fluency includes the evaluation of socio-cultural and cognitive factors in SLA and must fit the culture and language of the Secwépemc people. For endangered languages, there are rarely any situations to interact in the language in a natural way. This results in less exposure to the language and quietly erodes a novice speaker's confidence. Due to the complexity of Secwepemctsín, adult fluency depends on interacting with other speakers and an individual's determination to produce speech.
15 By reclaiming Secwépemc culture and relearning Secwépemc way of life, social identity forms and reshapes the society. For adults, the cognitive factors in SLA concerns fluency, and how it is defined. Language assessment is an intimidating process and should only be seen as what a speaker "can do." Further to Lai's research on Secwépemc language acquisition by a young child, "there is no question that the overwhelming dominance of English and the insufficiency of social context" are greater barriers for children without fluent parents using the language at home (Lai and Ignace 1998, 333). Becoming aware of the socio-cultural and cognitive factors in SLA is the beginning to language renewal and intergenerational transmission.
Similarities in first and second language acquisition: • Chomsky's theory about "universal grammar implies that all languages have a common structural basis and the human brain contains a limited set of constraints for organizing language" ("Universal Grammar"). For both first and second language acquisition, universal grammar influences learning. • In order to internalize language, "their speech will not be perfect, complete, or grammatically correct, but they will be using the language to communicate" (First Peoples Cultural Council 2014, 12). • Learners will move slowly or quickly through stages of acquisition. "Language use necessitates learning, and that what is learned is of use for the purposes of real, meaningful and purposeful communication with other speakers or learners" (Green 2017, 45) • Age affects proficiency - "The empirical research on the effect of age and second language acquisition were consistent with three generalizations: adults proceed through early stages of second language development faster than children, older children acquire faster than younger children, and acquirers who begin natural exposure to second languages during childhood generally achieve higher second language proficiency than those beginning as adults. Thus, it is not simply the case that "younger is better"; children are superior to adults only in the long run " (Krashen 1982, 43). • Comprehensible input is needed for learners to learn language context - "CCI involves practical, teacher-fronted activities with visuals, pictures and props to teach and practice small chunks of vocabulary" (Ignace 2009, 42).
Differences in first and second language acquisition: • First language acquisition contains learning a single set of grammatical structures. In SLA, there is possible positive and negative transfer between languages. Secwepemctsín concept of interlanguage transmission is demonstrated in A Preliminary Analysis of Secwépemc Language Acquisition by a Young Child as mixed utterances "when using morphemes from both languages" (Lai and Ignace 1998, 327). • In first language acquisition, children spend years listening to language, "babbling" (O'Grady 2012, 330), and using "utterances" (Lai and Ignace 1998,
16 337) before forming sentences. Learning is more rapid for older SLA learners and sentences are formed in shorter period of time. • SLA is different for older learners who have more life experience and can use "metacognitive awareness" (Green 2017, 52) in learning by analyzing and manipulating grammatical structures to speed up the learning process. • First language learners always achieve native proficiency. "By puberty (or likely by as young as age 7), most humans lose the ability to develop native- like pronunciation" (First Peoples Cultural Council 2014, 8). Within endangered language communities, SLA learners have fewer opportunities to learn language authentically and this reduces native-like proficiency. • First language learners have many chances to practice with native speakers (especially caregivers), "if they are given the opportunity to attend early childhood heritage language immersion programs such as language nests" (McIvor 2004, 25). SLA learners may or may not have opportunity to practice with speakers, "however, in communities where fluent Elders are few, very elderly or in poor health, the future of the language may depend upon the creation of new adult speakers… then they will become solely responsible to staff the classroom stylized nests" (Chambers 2014, 188) • Not everyone acquires a second language, but everyone acquires at least one language and it is a natural process - but not everyone acquires a second language and it is a conscious effort on part of the learner2
2.2.2. Challenges
One of the immediate challenges in starting an early years language immersion program is to dispel the myths about second language learning:
Myth 1: Speaking only one language is better for children. Myth 2: Hearing and speaking two or more language will be confusing for the child. Myth 3: Children using two languages at once is a sign of confusion. Myth 4: Learning two languages causes language delays (First Peoples Cultural Council 2014, 14; McIvor 2004, 62)
The "dark side of the language" (Chambers 2014, 132) instigated by colonial government systems, such as disenfranchisement and residential schools, sought to assimilate Indigenous people into the mainstream society by taking away Indian status, forcing families to send their children to boarding schools and telling Indigenous parents that their child only needs to know English in order to get a job and become good citizens of the English society. Many L1 parents did not pass on the language to their
2 Similarities and differences of second language acquisition summarized and adapted from: multilingualism.pbworks.com
17 children (McIvor 2004, 61; Ignace 2016, 5), which in turn, resulted in endangered languages. "Consequently, the development and delivery of language nest programs entails many challenges such as the lack of supportive legislation and funding support in Canada, state certification or licensing requirements, shortage of fluent speakers with training in immersion methods, and qualified staff with fluency" (Chambers 2014, 44). The essentials of a language nest program model are "achieving language immersion, building your team and sharing the vision, parent involvement, building community support, cultural activities and evaluation" (First Peoples Cultural Council 2014, 17-26; McIvor 2004, 54-64). Ironically, the essentials are also challenges to maintaining the language nest program. Financial challenges "of operating a full immersion stand-alone language nest for approximately six to eight children for fifteen to twenty hours a week could run anywhere from $40,000 to $100,000 annually, depending upon the numbers of fluent Elders and staff that are hired" (Chambers 2014, 134). Language teaching materials for the early years are limited, therefore, educators and caregivers invest a lot of time and energy making resources appropriate for 0-5 year old children.
Successes
Despite the challenges, language nest programs model success and "show promise for the healing of intergenerational relations and the reclamation of family ways of knowing and being" (Chambers 2014, 186; McIvor 2004, 82) by bringing elders and children together and strengthening family connections. Young children have a basic human right to hear the language and "knowing the language of one's ancestors greatly contributes to a sense of belonging" (Chambers 2014, 189). Improved research strategies show that language knowledge "develops resiliency in Aboriginal children who may face racism and other disadvantages of being Aboriginal in a colonial society" (Chambers 2014, 190; McIvor 2004, 79). Creating language nest programs "enhance the lives of involved fluent Elders" (Chambers 2014, 191), assist with the "creation of new fluent speakers" (Chambers 2014, 191; McIvor 2004, 58; Ignace 2016, 15) and have "positive effects for the teacher" (McIvor 2004, 68). Some positive effects for the teacher include: “gaining, practicing, continuing to use the language daily… understanding the language has grown immensely… great joy… satisfaction… remembering the language, gaining confidence in speaking it again… and being given the opportunity to learn cultural ways of being in the world (i.e. being more flexible in teaching children and seeing the world)” (McIvor 2004, 68). Further successes include the "language nest as a
18 catalyst to change attitudes" (McIvor 2004, 77) and "cultural continuation through language" (McIvor 2004, 83; Ignace 2016, 24).
2.3. Strategies Used in Language Revitalization for Adult Learners
Informal language classes as a language revitalization strategy is a possibility for some adult learners, for example, those who may need to ease into a language learning plan. Some communities create a language learning space during the beginning phase of language revitalization, especially when a community lacks a formal strategy or the language is no longer spoken at home or nearly extinct. Although informal languages classes have purpose, "they are not a way for someone to learn to speak the language. Learning to speak the language can only come through intensive exposure and practice to connected speech and real conversation" (Hinton 2001, 180). There is limited linguistic research on the strategies used in language revitalization for adult learners, since the research focuses on teaching school-aged children for dominant languages, such as French in Canada. The research has proven how the immersion classrooms cannot save a language from dying. The parent generation must actively reinforce the language at home, in addition to other community programs. Schools can still help by creating a new team of adult language speakers to close the gap for home speaking, "since the fear of having their children enter schools without knowing the language of the school was one of the main reasons that previous generations switched to English at home in the first place (i.e. residential school era)" (Hinton 2001, 182).
2.4. Making a Case for ECE Immersion Practices
To become an early childhood educator (ECE) in British Columbia, an adult must complete an accredited and approved early childhood educator program at a recognized institution. During full-time studies, a diploma takes three semesters to complete. Therefore, an adult can become a qualified ECE within two years, and with the right mentoring program and studying, could become a fluent speaker for the early years in following two years. "Instructional frameworks used at Six Nations are: on-line courses, night courses, language camps, self-directed learning, master-apprentice program, pre- school, elementary and high school, adult immersion programs, and university/college
19 programs and courses… with the result of adult immersion program rated as the most effective at creating speakers" (Green 2017, 36). In a community of no fluent language teachers, early years program goals should include: "rich immersion style teaching, hiring a speaker as a consultant to the teacher, where the teacher is honour bound to increase his or her fluency level as much as possible" (Hinton 2001, 188). "It is also widely known that a child's caretaker provides a linguistic model for the child… of course, if parents are willing and able to learn alongside their children and reinforce the language at home to the best of their ability, this will only increase the chances for language maintenance beyond the language nest program" (McIvor 2004, 25).
2.5. Summary
Little Fawn Nursery's early years immersion program is the next best option of raising children in the language by using effective second language teaching practices for creating fluent language speakers in a short time period. "Seen from this perspective the definition of "language nest" is best based on the aspirations and intent of the program. Given the dire status of many of BC's Indigenous languages, the development and delivery of a language nest program may present many complex questions" (Chambers 2014, 135). In order for LFN to achieve immersion goals, a new generation of adult speakers must be quickly trained in Secwepemctsín in the next five years. Second-language acquisition research for Indigenous languages focuses on teaching children in school settings. Six Nations linguistic research not only confirms adult immersion as the most effective for creating fluent speakers, but includes the most appropriate teaching and learning methods for a beginner speaker. In the research study, an intermediate level (at minimum) is identified as the goal for the ECE’s level of language proficiency, in order to provide a rich immersion environment for children 0-5 years old. In acknowledging and supporting Michel’s doctoral thesis Trickster’s Path to Language Transformation: Stories of Secwepemc Immersion from Chief Atahm School and the battle to reclaim a language, this research adds to the story about “the structural support systems, including administration, funding, resource development, and teacher training, that facilitate the operation of Indigenous language immersion” (2018, 256).
20 2.6. Research Rationale
Canada's tragic history of assimilation attempts by racist government policies and government-funded, church-run schools is accredited for the state of the Indigenous languages. The Secwépemc Nation's bitter truth partly rests with the fact that "Secwépemc language school programs that have been in existence for nearly 20 years, they have not led to proficiency, let alone increased use of the language among the younger generation" (Lai and Ignace 1998, 322). Our children not being raised at home in the language has resulted in a critically endangered state for Secwepemctsín. "Acquisition takes time; it takes far more than five hours per week over nine months to acquire the subjunctive. It may, in fact, take years… Learning is different… This leads us to one major problem. Language curriculum and texts are designed by people like us, people who learn quickly and who derive satisfaction from it. The vast majority of our students, however, are not as interested in the structure of language as we are, and get their pleasures elsewhere!" (Krashen 1982, 187). The research study demonstrates how language domains defined by unique community goals will increase proficiency in adults speakers, in turn, who then can accurately speak to the children. Fluent caregivers are essential to a successful early years immersion program. Existing research about Indigenous language nest programs in Canada demonstrates how "Indigenous young children have a basic human right to be raised in their heritage language and benefits Elders" (Chambers 2014, 189), however, a language nest program cannot exist without the educators fluent in the language. This is the somber fact for the TteS community. "Many linguists agree that the average age of language speakers largely indicates a language's health and predicated longevity. UNESCO's Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger of Disappearing considers a language endangered if it is not being learned by at least 30% of the children in a community" (McIvor 2004, 15).
Currently, there are an assortment of prominent and inspiring language revitalization studies written by indigenous scholars explaining how indigenous languages are endangered, how indigenous language immersion programming is the most effective way to save or revive a language, and how indigenous curriculum will help organize and prepare for the survival of a community's language. In response to the dire need for Secwepemctsín speakers of the Tk’emlúpsemc variety, LFN mobilized and trained early childhood educators (i.e. novice language speakers), and thus helped to
21 bridge the gap. Secwépemc elders who may or may not speak the language continually stress the importance of our children and families learning and knowing Secwepemctsín. Increasingly, adults are realizing the importance of learning and knowing Secwepemctsín for a connection to identity and to preserve language knowledge for our future generations. From January 2019 to March 2019, LFN early childhood educators adapted a mentorship plan with guidance from L1 fluent speakers and developed innovative language learning resources to accompany the early years curricula. This study added to the documentary work on Secwepemctsín by presenting innovative multi- media resources (e.g. Smart Board technology), study materials to enhance the pronunciation and grammar usage of educators (e.g. audio and video recordings) to engage learners and speakers of all ages. Furthermore, this study strengthened the relationship between the local Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc community and Simon Fraser University through respective and reciprocal consultation throughout the research process.
22 Chapter 3. Research Method
3.1. Methodology
Community Contributions to Research
The Little Fawn Nursery (LFN) School is operated under the guidance and direction of the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc leaders and community members. LFN is classified as a band-operated K4 (preschool) program for 4-5 year old children. The LFN began in 1967 with 23 children with a very loving and patient teacher, Mrs. McLean. When the Nursery first began it was called the ‘Paul Creek Kindergarten/Nursery’ and it was one of the very first band-operated schools in Canada. The key people in initiating the start of the Nursery/Kindergarten were: Martha Paul, Daniel Seymour, Ken (Snooks) Manuel, and Mildred Gottfriedson. The Chief at the time was Clarence Jules, Sr. and the Council members were: Tommy Casimir, Gus Gottfriedson, Sr. and Joseph M. Jules. In 1997, Jeanette Jules advocated for and opened the new Little Fawn Nursery School building. LFN celebrated its 50th Anniversary in 2017, this included a $1.2M building expansion project sponsored by the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc community and the Ministry of Children and Family Development – Major Capital Program. This project addressed a community strategic goal of housing children 0 – 5 years old in a safe and healthy environment.
Diena Jules, Felicity Jules and Dr. Janice D. Billy implemented a 50% Secwépemc language immersion program in 2010, with a community goal for increasing fluency and reclaiming Secwépemc ways of knowing and teaching (this includes the cognitive and spiritual reconstruction of traditional parenting - healing the community). The main goal of the immersion program was to immerse the students in the language in a risk-free, interactive environment that will promote the understanding and speaking of Secwepemctsín. Student assessment was based on the TPR manual “Teaching Secwepemctsín Through Action” through the unit quizzes at the end of each unit. “Students who attended the program on a regular basis scored 90% and above. Other assessments included: general observation through level of participation, reports from parents (of their children speaking/singing in the language)” (D. Billy 2013, 9).
23 In 2018, LFN successfully added provincially licensed child care spaces for infants and toddlers with a major building expansion project to enhance the community's innovative early years strategy. LFN, inspired by Chief Atahm School and Language Nest (a neighbouring Secwépemc community), has set a community and educational long-term goal of becoming a Secwépemc language immersion program for children up to the age of six years old. The language nest handbook prepared by the First Peoples Cultural Council affirms that, "language immersion helps children develop the skills they need to become fluent speakers" (2014, 11).
The LFN preschool program reached its goal of language immersion in the 2016/2017 school year. Under Jessica Arnouse's (principal researcher) guidance and language support, the educators speak Secwepemctsín from 7:30 - 11:30, Monday to Friday. The preschool educators received daily mentoring in Secwepemctsín. The team's passion for language renewal was a clear driving force for this accomplishment. Secwepemctsín "scripts" worked since all could read the language. The "scripts" were similar to cheat sheets posted on the wall or written on white boards. This is not viewed as a language nest technique, but it worked for our group since we were all extremely dedicated to speaking Secwepemctsín and the scripts kept English out of the learning environment. Being new to teaching 3-5 year old children, I was grateful to receive guidance from Rhonda J. Jules, TteS band member and Early Childhood Educator, vested in her community's early years program. Rhonda is an experienced and skilled ECE, interacts with the young children at ease, and had endless techniques for keeping the children engaged with the language by making activities fun. Since the opening of the new Early Childhood Centre on January 8, 2018, LFN is in a transition phase for language renewal. The TteS community does not have active L1 language teachers. In an attempt to provide rich immersion opportunities, this research study demonstrates the importance of a positive and nurturing learning environment lead by second-language learners (i.e. early childhood educators) and the significance of trained Secwépemc linguists (i.e. bridging the Secwépemc ways of knowing with the academic world for the enhancement of Secwepemctsín). TteS has greatly contributed to the research study through the decades of resistance to tragic historic events aimed at stamping out Tk'emlupsemctsín (language variety of the TteS people).
24 Community Context
The Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc (TteS) community is one of the remaining seventeen communities located within the Secwepemc Nation. The TteS has the largest population of Secwépemc people with over 1,300 band members. The Secwepemc Nation is located in the south-central interior of British Columbia and spans approximately 180,000 square kilometres. The majority of the Tk’emlúpsemc community is adjacent to Kamloops, British Columba – a city of more than 80,000 people. "The Tk‘emlúpsemc, ‘the people of the confluence’, now known as the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc are members of the Interior-Salish Secwepemc (Shuswap) speaking peoples of British Columbia. The Shuswap or Secwepemc people occupy a vast territory of the interior of British Columbia. This traditional territory stretches from the Columbia River valley along the Rocky Mountains, west to the Fraser River, and south to the Arrow Lakes" ("Our Land" 2012).
At one time, the Tk'emlúpsemc community only spoke Secwepemctsín (the language of the Secwépemc people) and depended on the natural resources of the land by moving throughout the vast Secwépemc territory during the warmer seasons and climates. The people would fish, hunt, gather plants and medicines, and then preserve items through drying or smoking techniques. During the cold winter months, the Tk'emlúpsemc remained stationary in a village of pithouses near the water ways. The main Tk'emlúpsemc village was located along the north side of the North and South Thompson Rivers convergence, where physical remnants of pithouse depressions exist today. “In all ways of life, the land and its resources fed the people, and their survival was based on an integral and respectful partnership with it. The language provides the framework for this philosophical understanding of the land and relates to concepts found in science, philosophy, natural law, and spirituality all integrated together” (Tk’emlúpsemc Native Language Program 2005, 8).
The Tk’emlúpsemc community is merely separated from the hectic and bustling City of Kamloops by the South and North Thompson Rivers. For more than 150 years, the TteS has resisted linguistic and cultural oppression due to: the community's close proximity to Kamloops, former days of the Kamloops Fur Trading Post, devastating impacts of the Kamloops Indian Residential School, and temptations of mainstream society - "city life." The TteS language variety is tremendously endangered and, more
25 crucially, has few L1 fluent speakers. With the guidance of two L1 fluent speaking elders, LFN will mobilize and mentor early childhood educators (non-fluent speakers and second-language learners of Secwepemctsín) using the Little Fawn Nursery Preschool Curriculum Draft and the Secwepemctsín Kindergarten-Grade 1 Curriculum as a foundational teaching method combined with innovative multi-media resources.
Program Descriptions
LFN is a provincially licensed early childhood centre for 0 - 5 year old children. The facility is equipped with three large activity rooms, custom-made cubby room, child- size bathrooms, three diapering stations, three nap/quiet rooms, state of the art kitchen, two offices, staff room, two staff bathrooms, two laundry rooms, storage closets, security doors and camera systems, roof-top solar panels. The infant and toddler activity room is licensed for twelve children under 36 months old. The 3-5 activity room is licensed for 20 children from the ages three to five years old. The preschool activity room is federally licensed as a First Nations School under the Indigenous Services Canada. LFN annually employs nine full-time staff to care for the children and operate the program. The licensing context of LFN impacts the program in the following ways:
• every four children under 36 months old must have access to a qualified early childhood educator with an infant and toddler certificate at all times • every eight children from the ages of three to five years old must have access to one early childhood educator at all times • every ten children in the preschool program must have access to one early childhood educator at all times
The infant/toddler and 3-5 program continues intake of children, as child care spaces become available as per child care regulations. However, the preschool runs from September to June every year. This program runs from 7:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., Monday to Friday. Due to the unique language status and development needs of the TteS community, LFN is in a transition phase to build fluency for the next five to six years. LFN employed four full-time educators for the preschool program, and three out of four achieved an immersion environment. Since the facility added on two new activity rooms, this included hiring more educators. The new educators did not speak the language (but are willing to learn), therefore, the entire facility’s fluency is in a transition phase for the next five years to allow enough time for the novice speakers to enhance their abilities. The community must take a different approach to language immersion programming. The administrative and financial success of LFN depends on enrolment
26 numbers to offset the program's expenditures. With the expertise of the LFN Administrator (on-site language mentor) collaborating with L1 speakers, Language Coordinator, Education Department Manager, Chief and Council and community members, a language immersion program goal directs the employees, financial resources and curriculum development. All LFN employees have First Nations ancestry and are dedicated to learning Secwepemctsín in order to speak and sing to all the children and family members. This allows LFN to overcome one of the main barriers to language revitalization – hiring educators/language learners with an open heart and open mind.
3.2. Participants
The TteS community was chosen for research partly out of convenience and partly out of familiarity. The researcher lives near the community, has work in the community for eight years in the language revitalization sector, and has established relationships with language and culture experts. The researcher formulated the study based on: her own ways of Secwépemc knowing developed through her life, particular Secwepemctsín knowledge, acquired language speaking and teaching skills, efficient program administrative skills, linguistic field studies and insider researcher advantages. The researcher arrived at the Linguistics of a First Nations Language Master of Arts program by the encouragement of Dr. Marianne Ignace, who has inspired and helped Indigenous people to reclaim their heritage language (and further, their identity).
3.2.1. Inclusion Criteria
Consequently, research study is limited to four participants - two L1 speakers of Secwepemctsín (elders) and to two L2 speakers (LFN educators) who have been learning Secwepemctsín for at least six months or more with the goal or intention to continue learning and/or teaching the language to children. Due to the critical state of Secwepemctsín, it is not only important for LFN educators to continually learn Secwepemctsín but must show motivation to progress in their learning and/or teaching of the language. For example, participation in Secwépemc language classes, demonstrated involvement with organizations focused on promotion of Secwepemctsín learning and teaching, or voluntarily studying published resources. LFN educators are
27 required to possess a Secwépemc Language Proficiency Certificate or learn the language. All LFN job descriptions include the statement, “fulling participating in on-the- job language mentoring.” In addition to job descriptions, all employees complete training plans with the LFN Administrator which includes language and culture goals.
3.2.2. Exclusion Criteria
Those who are not eligible to be educators at LFN, due to child care regulations, cannot participate in this research study. LFN is a provincially licensed child care facility and is regulated by the Community Care and Assisted Living Act - Child Care Licensing Regulation. Those who are not L1 speakers (in the case of fluent speaker participants) cannot participate in this research study, due to the researcher’s goal of eliciting authentic speech. One of the largest barriers to the revitalization of Secwepemctsín stems from the Residential School Era and its psychological effects on the survivors. All LFN educators believe in the revitalization of Secwepemctsín and do not have barriers to learning Secwepemctsín. In order for the study to progress forward, participants must initially display an openness and willingness to learn to speak Secwepemctsín. Additionally, L1 speakers must consent to and successfully complete a criminal record check (vulnerable section) through the Ministry of Justice, and align with values and teaching of very young children.
3.2.3. Participant Procedures
• At the beginning of the study, participants will complete a self-assessment language questionnaire • During the study, participants will receive training about Secwepemctsín multi- media resources, mentorship from fluent speaking elders and audio-recordings • Prior and ending each month, the principal investigator will assess participant vocabulary and phrase knowledge by the way of a word count
The researcher knew all of the study participants prior to their participation. The researcher discussed the sampling choice with the research study supervisor. The researcher's involvement with the LFN as the Administrator initially could be thought of a conflict of interest, since the LFN educators are subordinates. However, this is not an uncommon situation in Indigenous communities as language teachers, advocates and
28 mentors tend to take on many different roles (paid and voluntary). In predicting and understanding the complex web of relationships within Indigenous communities, my involvement with LFN does not serve as a barrier to data collection. All participants were given time to reflect on the research study and to ask questions. As stated in the informed consent form, participation is voluntary and participants have the right to refuse to participate or choose to withdraw from the study at any time without any negative consequences. In consideration of my dual roles at LFN, my involvement as the principal investigator took precedence during the research procedures and methods and as I collected data.
3.3. Data Collection Procedures (triangulation)
This research gathered linguistic data about beginner language speakers and L1 speakers at LFN by the way of methodological triangulation. It is believed that our own people know what is needed to create a language domain for the early years program within the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc community. Data was collected through three methods, hence triangulation: primary research (e.g. field notes, self-assessment questionnaire, audio and video recordings and proficiency assessments/teacher talk), secondary research (e.g. curriculum, dictionaries, word-lists, apps, online games and smart board activities) and a literature review to formulate data concerning the design and implementation of an early years immersion program.
Data was elicited from L1 speakers to build effective language learning resources that will help prepare early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín by the means of word lists, question and answer forms, and phrases (see Appendices A – F). The beginner speakers were paired with L1 speakers or intermediate-level speakers through mentorship. The educators stayed one step ahead of the children to “stay in the language” while leading learning stations, such as play dough making, and Smart Board activities.
Proficiency assessment will collect statistical word count of accurate pronunciation and grammar usage. The proficiency assessments will be conducted by L1 speakers or intermediate-advanced speakers through proficiency check lists and, with consent from the educators, proficiency assessments were audio recorded. The data collected will demonstrate the importance of hands-on language resources for
29 rapidly enhancing adult learner fluency skills, increase confidence and improve grammatical and phonological accuracy.
The researcher has extensive experience and knowledge of Secwépemc curriculum for language teachers. Most of the curriculum was developed by the Secwépemc Cultural Education Society from 1980 to 2005. Aert Kuipers, a Dutch linguistics professor, elicited information from L1 speakers and published the first Secwépemc dictionary and word list in 1974. Kuiper also published a language learning booklet called, “A Shuswap Course” and “The Shuswap Language” which describes grammar, morphology, and syntax. As the researcher verified script information or elicited new information from the L1 speakers, there were moments of forgetting words or phrases. The dictionary, word list, and Secwépemc app helped remind L1 speakers about words or phrases. The researcher’s knowledge of curriculum and other published resources helped to develop the basic structure of preschool language immersion session (see section 4.6.1).
The literature review began with research conducted by indigenous scholars or research about indigenous language revitalization efforts for the early years (i.e. children from the age 0-5 years old). Natalie Chambers wrote, “They All Talk Okanagan and I Know What They Are Saying.” Language Nests in the Early Years: Insights, Challenges, and Promising Practices – a doctoral thesis describing the “benefits that young children and fluent Elders experience through their involvement in early language immersion programs” (2014, ii). Chambers conducted twenty-one interviews to gather information for those involved in mobilizing people and resources to develop a language nest. Onowa McIvor wrote, “Building the Nests: Indigenous Language Revitalization in Canada Through Early Childhood Immersion Programs” – a master of arts thesis “using qualitative research methodologies involving observations and interviews of key community members in two Indigenous communities which have developed language nest programs” (2004, ii). Kathryn A. Michel wrote, “Trickster’s Path to Language Transformation: Stories of Secwepemc Immersion from Chief Atahm School” – a doctoral thesis “of stories focusing on the early experiences of the founding members of Chief Atahm School helped uncover how an Indigenous community worked to reconnect the self to community, through language” (2018, ii).
30 3.4. Data Interpretation
3.4.1. Indigenous Methodologies
In line with Indigenous Methodology, this research study continually examines and reflects the relationship between the researcher and the elder fluent speakers. The relationship I have with my elder language mentors is respectful, reciprocal and fully develops at a crucial time for this research study. "In Indigenous Methodologies, the vision for quality research is measured by the creation and nurturance of reciprocal relationships with participants, families and communities" (Chambers 2014, 72). In respecting the unique needs of the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc community, the research must foremost benefit language renewal efforts and help reclaim the community's specific language dialect. I believe the research is useful and celebrates Secwépemc knowledge, culture and language. My role as a Secwépemc researcher is clear because my academic progress is guided by Secwépemc language teachers and mentors and is rooted in respect for others. Therefore, I am not burdened by the challenges of non- Indigenous researchers and conduct my research in a good way and to support other Indigenous research and scholarship.
3.4.2. Secwepemc Ways of Knowing/Methodology
My thoughts about methodology are primarily based on a Secwepemc viewpoint with no intention to misrepresent other Indigenous and Non-Indigenous research and methods in the world as we are all unique individuals and our communities are unique to our own ways and knowing. It is my hope to even portray or shed some light on the contributions of experts and scholars.
During some undergraduate courses, I listened to and read many Sk’elép (coyote) stories. You see, Sk’elép is considered a trickster who showed us what to do and what not to do, and also links the past to the present. Sk’elép stories contain moral lessons and help us think about our changing world, this includes language renewal efforts. I remember sitting in class one day and listening to one particular story called Coyote and His Hosts. It is a transformer story about Coyote meeting and being individually hosted by Grizzly Bear, Fish Oil Man, Beaver Man and Kingfisher Man. As each transformer being invites Coyote to his home, he feeds Coyote and in turn shows
31 Coyote his power. Even though each host tells Coyote not to copy his power, Coyote thinks he is smarter, copies their power, gets hurt and eventually dies. Kingfisher Man brings Coyote back to life and tells him to hang on to his own ways otherwise he will get hurt. "As the story about Coyote and his hosts reminds us, we must not try to copy our ways from others but must be true to our own way of doing things" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 63).
One Wikipedia article defines methodology as "the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied to a field of study. It offers the theoretical underpinnings for understanding which method, set of methods, or best practices can be applied to a specific case" (Wikipedia contributors, 2018). This research study is based on Secwépemc Methodology as our peoples way of describing best practices in achieving language fluency. As the research study pertains to Secwepemctsín and through the field of linguistics, the research questions reflect our own way of doing things at the Little Fawn Nursery.
3.5. Ethical Consideration
When the word "research" is mentioned in Secwépemc communities, our elders tell us stories about negative experiences. Past researchers created historical grievances in the Secwépemc community by grave-robbing, tricking our community leaders, copyrighting Secwépemc legends and not sharing or bringing back the information to the people. These historical grievances effected our elders in such a way that, to this day, many do not share their knowledge at all. Our elders are extremely concerned with research being conducted in our communities, which further endangers Secwépemc traditional knowledge by not passing the information to the next generation of learners and future teachers. This kind of information weighs heavily on an Indigenous researcher.
3.5.1. Personal Responsibility and Preparation
In an attempt to connect the historical grievances in the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc community and to demonstrate why our elders do not trust researchers, there is a shared history about Chief Louis - the last hereditary chief of the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc people. He was highly respected and well known for the 60-year leadership
32 of his people and his fight for Aboriginal Rights and Title. In the late 1800s and with the help of the archaeologist Harlan Smith, Franz Boas "received Chief Louis's consent for anthropometric work - which involved being cast in plaster, measured, and photographed - Boas admitted using a ruse, telling the chief that Queen Victoria had requested a photograph and bust of him, in recognition of his being a great chief" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 75). Further disrespect towards Chief Louis's photographs were shown at the American Museum of Natural History as an "anonymous Secwépemc male," until a 1997 exhibit rightly named him Chief Louis. The legacy of grave-robbing and lying to revered and well-respected leaders of the Secwépemc was documented by Boas and through the Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Ironically, our Skeetchestn elders have been using the ethnographic work of Boas in an effort to reclaim Secwépemc oral histories for language renewal efforts over the last five years.
When I began formulating research questions for this study, the stories from our elders reminded and guided the research questions. In response to the procedures and methods required to conduct research on my own people, at first, there was an inner conflict about having to prove to Western science why my research study was valuable in becoming an Indigenous scholar. In my heart and mind, I already knew that the language renewal efforts are invaluable and are working. We learn our language, we teach our language to someone else and, in turn, we learn again. This research study not only further shaped my viewpoint and knowledge on Secwépemc ways of knowing, values and beliefs, but also strengthened my research skills and knowledge of Western science.
Growing up within an Indigenous community, protocols of respect exist as the foundation of living and thinking. As a young person, you are subtly taught how to respect your elders and this includes all those older than you. It was not only considered rude to disrespect your elders by not listening, but also considered rude to question your elders. Even though I was not raised by fluent speakers of the Secwepemctsín, the idea of respect and listening to the elders was instilled as a very important protocol during my childhood. Although many of our communities speak English, the value of respect was evident in teaching young people. In dedicating the last decade of my life to language renewal efforts, I work with L1 speakers in their 70s and 80s. I spent a lot of time listening to their stories in English and Secwepemctsín. I had the opportunity to learn Secwepemctsín from outstanding and knowledgeable teachers and mentors. I hold a lot
33 of respect for their wisdom and patience, which made it difficult to "question" them on linguistic topics during this research study. I focused the main research questions on demonstrating the invaluable linguistic knowledge of our elder fluent speakers through the development of effective and innovative multi-media resources. I wanted their voices to be heard and to help guide our daily language renewal efforts. Our elders give us the foundation to enhance our learning and teaching skills.
As a Secwépemc person, my research skills developed from community protocols first and foremost and with hopes of changing the negativity surrounding academic paradigms. In having strong emotional connections to Secwepemctsín language renewal efforts, my thoughts about conducting research on my own people had to be meaningful and uplifting.
3.5.2. Obtaining Consent
All potential participants were given an Informed Consent Form titled, "Me7 Tslxemwílc-kt es Secwepemctsném-kt! (Secwépemc Language Resource Development for Little Fawn Nursery - An Early Years Language Immersion Program)." Consent was obtained from parents/guardians of all LFN children, participants and L1 speakers in writing by the principal investigator using the Informed Consent Form. The principal investigator communicated the information contained in the Informed Consent form and Study Details for participants in verbal form, as needed.
The request to conduct research was approved by Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc Chief and Council. After meeting with the Council, Chief Roseanne Casimir signed a letter of approval to conduct research. The letter was included with my ethics application to the Office of Research Ethics at Simon Fraser University. On December 21, 2018, I received ethics approval.
3.5.3. Participant Withdrawal
In compliance with TCPS 2 (2014), Article 3.1 B and C, participants were informed that they may withdraw from the study at any time before, during, or after its completion without penalty. Additionally, participants will be informed that they may
34 withdraw their data (e.g. audio recordings) at any stage of the project, as stated in the Informed Consent form.
3.5.4. Potential Benefits
Immediate benefits were anticipated for the participants of this study. All participants displayed enhanced fluency skills by the way of grammatical and phonological accuracy. Upon completion of the study, the results further support the urgency for Indigenous communities to build effective language learning resources and mentoring programs. Also, the demonstration of enhanced fluency skills by the educators will lead to increased revitalization of Secwepemctsín. The long-term benefits include: building capacity for educators, increased confidence in fluency skills, strengthening community pride, furthering community strategies, healing the community, and creating more speakers of the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc language variety.
3.5.5. Potential Risks
This study is as a minimal risk study. Participants reflected on their knowledge of Secwepemctsín and some minimally displayed negative emotions. For example, some participants felt discouraged with their novice pronunciation in comparison to how much time spent studying or practicing Secwepemctsín. Fluent speaker participants experienced slight frustration when they could not recall a specific word or phrase. However, every effort was made to keep participants safe and comfortable during planning and teaching sessions, and participants were informed to "take a break" at any time. Every attempt was made to keep the fluent speaker participants safe and comfortable as most are seventy to eighty years old. There is minimal risk to the children at LFN, since it is a provincially licensed facility and follows the British Columbia Child Care Regulations. Every attempt was made to keep the children safe and comfortable as the educators conducted the language teaching sessions. There was no risk to the researcher.
3.5.6. Participants Confidentiality Measures
The primary source data in the form of a self-reflection questionnaire by the educators will not be shared publicly. However, the researcher asked if the participants
35 wanted their identity to be disclosed in any subsequent publications or whether they wish their identity to remain confidential. All participants allowed the researcher to reveal their identity.
The primary source data in the form of audio recordings and word/phrase lists by the L1 speakers will be shared publicly for the benefit of language revitalization. The fluent speakers are invaluable and irreplaceable in this study, as such, they are held in highest regard as traditional knowledge keepers. L1 speakers of Secwepemctsín recognize other L1 speakers and represent the last generation of birth speakers. There is no one else suitable or accredited for this study. The principal investigator invited the TteS Language Coordinator to review and give feedback concerning the language teaching sessions, which confirmed respectful data gathering procedures.
3.5.7. Data Stewardship Plan
Data recorded from this project, including all multi-media recording, and word- processed documents are stored in electronic format (.wav and mp3 audio files, .mp4 video files and .docx and .pdf files) on a password-protected hard drive by the principal investigator, and a second copy is stored at Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc. Should future protocol agreements between Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc and Simon Fraser University Library Services be developed, a further digital copy of data will be stored at the SFU Library. As the project deals with documentation and revitalization of an endangered language, and that the multi-media recordings are invaluable, I request permission for the principal investigator and the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc to keep the copies of the recordings in perpetuity. As the principal investigator retains no intellectual property rights to the data gathered, any evaluation of requests for data will be discussed with Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc or their representatives. Participant data is stored in a locking file cabinet during the research study. On completion of the research study, all participant data was saved in digital format and stored in electronic files with a security code and on password protected computers.
3.5.8. Giving Back
Although a thesis document will be produced for Simon Fraser University and stored for public access in the university library, I produced multi-media resources for
36 language advocates for the research project. Culturally, I will continue to help other language teachers and beginner speakers develop a plan to achieve their fluency goal. Ethically, I will continue to help the TteS community revitalize the language. It is my goal to host professional development sessions for language teachers and early childhood educators, further to present materials for information sharing purposes. My hope is for TteS to be proud of their contributions to the research, the early years language immersion program and recognize the strengths existing in their community to start these initiatives.
3.5.9. Research Procedures and Methods Summary
The research procedures and methods used for this study answered the research study questions. The primary research methods gathered appropriate linguistic data to prepare the LFN early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín. The audio recordings helped the LFN educators to study, to memorize and to keep one step ahead of teaching the children in an immersion setting. The multi- media resources defined the language teaching strategies that work best to improve speaking proficiency and creating more second language speakers of Secwepemctsín. In addition, the resources proved effective for an early years language immersion program. This was proved by keeping the children engaged during mini-immersion sets. By combining the LFN and Skeetchestn curriculum, the data demonstrates improved fluency and the need for further curriculum development.
37 Chapter 4. Research Results
4.1. Introduction
The Secwepemc Nation formally began proficiency assessments with the guidance of the Secwépemc Cultural Education Society (SCES), a non-profit organization mandated to perpetuate, enhance, and document Secwépemc language, culture and history. In the 1990s, the British Columbia Teacher’s Federation (BCTF) collaborated with SCES to set up an application process in becoming a certified First Nations Language Teacher, namely Secwepemc. The BCTF regulations were implemented in school districts to safeguard language teacher positions and to ensure that qualified Secwépemc people were hired. One of the main sections to the application process was the approval of the Language Authority, which consisted of L1 speakers. Until about five years ago, SCES coordinated the Language Authority for the entire Secwépemc Nation. The Language Authority implemented a Terms of Reference and was a peer-selected group of highly fluent L1 speakers to guide this process. When someone wanted to pursue a career as a language teacher, a formal assessment was conducted by L1 speakers according to the applicant's dialect (north, west or east). This included explaining to the Language Authority who your family members are, and in turn, this verified your identity as a Secwépemc Nation member. A formal post-secondary education was not required to apply to the BCTF, therefore, the essential component was primarily as a proficient speaker. Secwépemc language leaders and advocates believed in the importance and urgency of our people speaking the language, and in turn, teaching the language to children. However, most applicants were requested to complete the First Nations Language Proficiency Certificate accredited by Simon Fraser University. A potential language teacher presented a Secwepemctsín language lesson in front of a group of L1 speakers that demonstrated pronunciation, grammar and teaching skills. I can confirm this process, since I successfully presented my language lesson to four L1 speakers some ten years ago. Although this process appeased BCTF teaching regulations, its primary purpose only addressed school district regulations and curriculum.
The mandate of the First Peoples Cultural Council (FPCC) is to assist B.C. First Nations in their efforts to revitalize their language, arts and cultures. Since 1990, the
38 FPCC has been administering the First Peoples’ Heritage, Language and Culture Program – this includes funding allocations, research, advocating at national levels, and offering training workshops. The researcher has direct experience managing FPCC programs, such as: Aboriginal Language Initiative, B.C. Language Initiative, Language Revitalization Planning, and Language Nest. Through past FPCC project coordination, the researcher reviewed, utilized and tailored various resources published by FPCC for the TteS community’s language revitalization goals. The FPCC resources and training (paired with the researcher’s knowledge and understanding of Secwepemc language, culture and history) validates the research study design and results. The Language Nest training and handbook helped the researcher initiate one of the main barriers to language fluency: keeping the English out of the language domain. Also, the Handbook sparked conversations about individual barriers to fluency and speaking skills.
The research design begins to address the information gap for the administration of a Secwépemc language immersion early years program. Researchers and information seekers have access to scholarly research conducted by Indigenous people worldwide, however, the Secwépemc Nation needs more perspectives for the language of Secwépemc people, especially for the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc variety. Dr. Ronald Ignace, Dr. Kathryn Michel and Dr. Janice D. Billy provided the Secwépemc Nation with excellent resources and traditional knowledge pertaining to Secwépemc people in the areas of Indigenous education, language revitalization, decolonization, and the triangulation of historic events through stsptékwle (Secwépemc legends). The research results demonstrate the possibilities to help solve our Nation’s barrier to fluency while living in the modern world. The answer to creating more speakers of Secwepemctsín is through the eyes, ears, and mouths of our children – they are the healing component to our language revitalization and reclamation dilemma. Historically, LFN was implemented by community leaders to take back and to lead the education of our children. Although LFN has evolved over the years, the education program was led and sanctioned by TteS leaders, and now, language revitalization advocates. As the children of the community need a team of fluent speaking educators and caregivers, the research results pave the way for enhanced fluency for language apprentices – the research participants. As two worlds work together (Secwépemc and non-Secwépemc) by combining modern day child regulations with Secwépemc ways of knowing, the research results answer the research questions. It is beneficial to the TteS community and study of linguistics to help
39 prepare early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín through the development of effective language learning resources and mentoring programs.
4.2. Self-Assessment
The Netolnew Language Learning Assessment Tool was completed by the participants on January 10, 2019. The participants were asked to complete only the Speaking - Beginner and Understanding - Beginner sections, a total of four pages, in recognition that all participants are beginner learners and speakers. The assessment tool looks at language skills and does not ask about grammar or vocabulary knowledge. For example, one question states, “I can ask simple questions using single words or short sentences,” and the learners checks one of the following answers, “not yet, rarely, sometimes, mostly, or always.” As described in Green's research titled, Pathways to Creating Onkwehonwehnéha Speakers at Six Nations of The Grand River Territory the "process of acquiring proficiency is unique to Indigenous languages and different from other languages of the world… the expectation of the community at Six Nations is that learners will eventually 'sound like' native speakers" (53). The research participants are inspired to learn Secwepemctsín and have their own knowledge, skills, experience and expertise of learning their first and other languages. According to Green's research about the 5 Stages for Language Acquisition, all participants achieved Stage 1: Motivation, and remain at Stage 2: Building a Base. This is the equivalency of novice- mid for the ACTFL proficiency guidelines.
Table 1 – Five Stage Language Acquisition Process of Onkwe’honwehnéha at Six Nations
Stages of Language ACTFL Proficiency Most Efficient Instructional Hours Acquisition Level Framework 1 Motivation BEGINNER 2 Build a Base NOVICE Elementary Immersion 0-900 Adult Immersion Year 1 University/College Programs 3 Exponential Growth INTERMEDIATE Adult Immersion Year 2 900-1800 4 Refining, Polishing, ADVANCED Adult Immersion Year 3 & 4 1800-3600 Sharpening 5 Finishing SUPERIOR Self-Guided Study 3600+ DISTINGUISHED (Green 2017, 54)
40 4.3. Classroom Talk Assessment
Unlike modern and dominant languages of the world, aptitude tests for Secwepemctsín do not exist. Individual prior learning assessments and language acquisition plans would help to reflect a learner’s needs and provide direction. The research study conducted a comprehension assessment for all participants on the topic of Classroom Talk (Appendix A). With the consent of each participant, the session was audio-recorded by the researcher. The L1 speaker read out the Secwepemctsín phrases and the participant verbally translated the meaning to English. For each phrase, the researcher checked the appropriate assessment result with: No, Somewhat, or Yes. The "No" result means the participant did not translate into English, displayed body language to mean they did not know, or clearly stated "I don't know." The "Somewhat" result means the participant attempted to translate, but did not demonstrate sufficient lexical or pronoun-marker knowledge. The "Yes" result means the participant clearly demonstrated exact lexical or pronoun-marker knowledge by accurately translating the meaning into English (see Table 2 for results). After completing the first assessment on January 10, 2019, participants received a copy of the classroom talk assessment and an audio recording to study.
The Classroom Talk Assessment helped the researcher and L1 speakers to gauge the participants knowledge of basic terminology and sentence structures prior to setting a work plan for the mentoring sessions. The participants scored high in their comprehension of the Classroom Talk words and phrases, which proved helpful when utilizing the Skeetchestn Kindergarten teaching methods (i.e. the participants quickly grasped question/answer sets) and mini-immersion setting goals. The Classroom Talk Assessment further concludes the importance of educators staying in the language throughout the lessons, using gestures to convey the meaning of the words, and repeating phrases and words of encouragement in Secwepemctsín about the children’s work and progress (Ignace 2009, 47). It was inspiring for the researcher to gauge the participants knowledge and to find out how much they comprehended. The findings allowed the researcher to focus on training the participants to produce speech, and less about teaching the classroom talk phrases first. This realization allowed for more research and training time on refining grammar and enhancing speech to improve
41 accuracy and confidence levels of the participants. At the end of the research study, the participants clearly understood all of the Classroom Talk phrases.
Table 2 – Classroom Talk Assessment
# of Phrases # of No # of Somewhat # of Yes Participant 59 7 11 41 1 59 24 7 29 2
Participant 1 Participant 2 60 40 30 40 20 20 10 0 0 Yes Somewhat No Yes Somewhat No
Participant 1 Participant 2
4.4. Multi-Media Resources
The research study supported the speech production of all participants through the Smart Board learning center about animals and birds, which aligns with Skeetchestn Kindergarten to Grade One curriculum. The participants used the Berlitz Method throughout the Smart Board learning center to interact with the children while only using Secwepemctsín. Technique 1 (Demonstration) enhanced the participants knowledge about the interactive question/answer set. L1 speakers reviewed and edited the multi- media resources, in addition to providing mentoring sessions to model pronunciation. See the Appendixes B-F for samples of “scripts.”
42 Figure 2 – Smart Board Activity: Animals and Birds
Figure 3 – Smart Board Activity: Kooshball Animals and Birds
43 Figure 4 – Smart Board Activity: Animal Tracks
Berlitz Method Technique 1 (Demonstration):
Salient Feature: Ask a question while pointing at an object or picture.
Linguistic Focus: Adjectives (comparison), adverbs, verb tenses, WH questions, straightforward vocabulary items, pronouns, passive voice
Examples:
Teacher: holding up a picture of a salmon: Yen ye7ene k kenkéknem? (Is it the case that this a black bear?)
Student: Mé7e. (Yes.)
Teacher, repeats: Mé7e, kenkéknem ye7éne. (Yes, it is a black bear.)
Teacher: Ts’i7-en yerí7? (Is that over there a deer?)
44 Student: Tá7a. (No.)
Teacher: Tá7a, ta7 ri7 k sts’i7s. (No, that one there is not deer)
The Berlitz Method enhanced participants speech about question and answer sentence structure. “Yes-or-no questions are marked by the enclitic n, the n follows the first stressed word of the sentence, and can be combined with the forms of ye-… in these cases ye- corresponds to English is it the case?“ (Kuipers 1974, 81-82). The hypothetical article k is before the object. This type of Secwepemctsín question always follows a strict word order. The positive answer or mé7e answer is less strict in regards to word order compared to the negation expressed as the ta7 meaning it is not the case. “Negation is followed by a nominalization with the article k and often accompanied by the deictic ri7 and expressed with the 3rd person pronoun-marker s” (Kuipers 1974, 81-82). A deictic is an expression which is dependent on the context in which it is used (e.g. that one there). Secwepemctsín interrogatives are an important foundation for beginner speakers to learn, including the accurate pronunciation for nominalization and 3rd person pronoun-marker s. During the study, participants became more aware of the Secwepemctsín syntax in regards to questions and answer sets, and demonstrated their knowledge through pronunciation accuracy in observed contexts.
Table 3 – Work Plan: Multi-Media Resources
What activities will The research participants will learn how to lead you do together to Secwepemctsín animal and bird learning centers with accomplish your multi-media resources in a “mini-immersion setting” language learning (Ignace 2009, 31). goals? Language Focus: 1. Smart Board Activity: Animals Birds Introduction
2. Smart Board Activity: Kooshball Animals
3. Smart Board Activity: Animal Tracks
4. Tmesméscen’ Bingo Game
5. Tmesméscen’ Memory Game
Verbs: emétentem (pronounce), estkenstéke7 (touch), tseq’míntem (throw), súcwem (recognize), píqwente (look at it), q’iyentéke7 (draw it)
Nouns: tcets’ (elk), kenkéknem (black bear), mélemst’ye (wolf), teníye (moose), smúwe7 (cougar), sk’emcís (grizzly
45 bear), xgwélemc (fox), skú7pecen (porcupine), sqlew7úw’i (beaver), qets’wéw’ye, (chipmunk), sqwyits (rabbit), kw’sicw (goose), speqmíc (swan), ts’kíkse7 (chickadee), cucwlé7 (meadowlark), spel’qwéqs (bald eagle), písell (trout), sqlelten7úw’i (sockeye salmon), sxwéxwle (minnows), nekéct (forest), setétkwe (river), keknméllcw (black bear den), sqlew7uwiméllcw (beaver lodge), st’ekcén (animal track), qw’exwqín’cen
Adjectives: xyum (big), kw’oyí7ese (small)
Number of Hours: Learning centers are planned as 20-minute mini-immersion settings. The participants lead each center with an ideal ratio of 1:5.
Dates: Daily, Monday to Friday
Details and To keep the young children engaged in learning Comments: Secwepemctsín, a variety of teaching techniques and resources are demonstrated.
4.5. Video Recording Assessment
4.5.1. Play-Doh Making Learning Centre
The research study evaluated the speech production of all participants through the Play-Doh Making Learning Centre, which aligns with Skeetchestn Kindergarten to Grade One curriculum and is partially adapted from Cuy’ re Secwepemctsném-kt (2009, 61). Total Physical Response (TPR) teaching method was used to reinforce physical action verbs, since Secwepemctsín is a verb-based language. There is a wealth of information encoded into verbs through prefixes, affixes, and infixes. TPR is a right-brain approach to second language learning and focuses on listening comprehension. At the beginning of the study, the vocabulary and phrases were new or unknown to the participants, therefore, the video recordings addressed the significance and benefit of language mentoring and daily language supports. L1 speakers, with the assistance of the researcher, drafted the TPR routine for making play-doh in Secwepemctsín (Appendix C). One week before the first video recording, participants familiarized themselves with the play-doh making recipe. The researcher gave the TPR routine draft to the participants two days before the first video recording to review or to practice. On
46 January 25, 2019, the participants demonstrated the first play-doh making learning center in Secwepemctsín for the L1 speakers and the researcher. The video recordings ranged from 8 to 18 minutes. The participants were assessed by the research at Novice- Low, according to ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. The play-doh making classroom activity focused on oral language development by encouraging listening and speaking skills for the participants.
Table 4 – Work Plan: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine
What activities will you The research participants will learn how to make play-doh do together to in Secwepemctsin and lead a “mini-immersion setting” accomplish your (Ignace 2009, 31). language learning goals? Language Focus: Verbs: k’úlem (to make), cíyem (to stir), kwnem (to take), píts’em (to press down), íp’em (to squeeze), kllew’smentwécwmentem (to divide it up equally), emétentem (to pronounce), tn (to put) Nouns: tseck’púcw (bowl), st’címen (spoon), cllúqwmen̓ (cup), qwtell, (cooking oil) peqpíq (flour), lesél (salt), melmálqwten (food coloring), qw7é7p (small bag)
Adjectives: t’paq (sticky), pllellt (thick)
Numeral Classifiers: nekw’éke7, seléke7, kelléke7, meséke7 (counting spoons); nekw’éwll, seléwll, kelléwll, meséwll (counting cups)
Language Skills: leading a TPR routine in Secwepemctsín for a minimum of 10 minutes
Note: coined the term for play-doh – semlóle7cw te syéksten (a clay toy)
Number of Hours: 3 hours per week mentoring program within language domain of LFN Each hour consisted of: 15 minutes of pronunciation practice, 30 minutes of play-doh making mini-immersion, 15 minutes of feedback
Dates: January 23, 2019 – edited TPR routine February 12, 2019 – first video recording February 13-28, 2019 – mentoring program March 1, 2019 – final video recording
47 Comments: It was each participants responsibility to practice after hours or on weekends. Participant were given the option for further pronunciation practice.
During the following weeks, the TPR play-doh routine was written on a large "cheat sheet" and posted on the wall for the participants to use as a reference (i.e. script) while leading play-doh making learning centers with the young children. The participants are experienced educators, therefore, proved that detailed "scripted curriculum does not limit the teacher's verbal interactions with students" (Ignace 2016, 84). Participants received a copy of the TPR play-doh routine and audio recordings to study. On March 1, 2019, the participants were video recorded for the final results of the study. The researcher immediately noticed enhanced speaking abilities with little reference towards the “script.” The basic script can be used as a milestone for novice speakers to achieve (i.e. memorizing). The research study was constrained by a time limit; however, participants were allowed to adapt the script (i.e. change the script). Table 5 provides an assessment (based on ACTFL) in regards to the participants ability to produce speech.
4.5.2. ACTFL Inspired Speaking Evaluation for Secwepemctsín
The research study adapts the ACTFL Guidelines for evaluating the participant’s functional language abilities. In describing the participants language ability, "performance is the ability to use language that has been learned and practiced in an instructional setting within familiar contexts and content areas" (2012, 4). Time is critical for developing Secwepemctsín speaking performance. The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines are “instrumental for evaluating a speakers functional language ability in real- world situations in a spontaneous and non-rehearsed context and has three major levels of descriptions Advanced, Intermediate and Novice with High, Mid, and Low sublevels” (ACTFL 2012, 3). The guidelines do not account for types of language acquisition, explain how an individual should learn a language and is not based on any particular theory. It is a global assessment tool that describes a language user’s abilities from highly articulate to no functional ability.
The researcher provided daily “on the job” mentoring to the participants from January 1, 2019 to March 1, 2019. The main goal for the play-doh making activity
48 allowed the participants to “focus on form” through a presentation approach by mastering first and second person forms – “this can be done by emphasizing it alone and staying in the language” (Ignace 2016, 21). The participants led the play-doh making group and presented accurate grammar structures like a short story, which generates language transmission to long-term memory. Since the study focused on participants producing speech, the L1 speakers and research supervisor discussed and agree with the participants speaking abilities. The researcher observed the L1 speakers reactions to the final play-doh making session. Compared to the first session and throughout the mentoring program, the L1 speakers did not feel the need to pronounce words and phrases for the participants. From the researcher’s viewpoint, this means the L1 speakers were satisfied with pronunciation and grammar structures coming from the participants. It is a general and respectful guidance technique to help beginner speakers with pronunciation and to avoid shaming or making a beginner feel bad about their language skills. It is a sign of reciprocal respect and caring. In addition, the researcher observed enhanced pronunciation (e.g. glottalized t and soft sounding c), accurate grammar skills (e.g. reduplicating ctétk’en and kwékwen for the first person form), and enhanced vocabulary skills (e.g. saying megmégtkwe for warm water instead of séwllkwe). In conclusion, the methodology works because learners moved between Novice Low and Novice Mid on the scale between Trial 1 and Trial 2 (see Table 5).
Effective language learning depends on effective instruction. However, how does one evaluate speaking proficiency in a community of few superior or advanced level speakers? What happens when educators do not have the fluency skills to teach the student and enhance fluency skills? Little Fawn Nursery faces this dilemma – the facility exists, the staff exist, and the children are ready to learn. In response to the limitations of the Language Proficiency Certificate to create fluent adult speakers of Secwepemctsín and the non-existence of a Secwépemc language institution (i.e. SFU Kamloops Campus), this research study pushes past these limitations and mobilizes adult speakers by implementing an “on the job” mentoring program. LFN lacks a formal evaluation program for the educators as they are guided through the early years curriculum. Currently, the existing Secwépemc Nation curriculum focuses on teaching language courses and provides excellent assessment methods, however, there are no assessment guidelines for educators learning to speak in immersion settings. The
49 participants followed the “mini-immersion” guidelines in the Skeetchestn Kindergarten- Grade One Curriculum:
If the teacher is not a fully fluent speaker, in a weekly prep session, review the vocabulary you require for your lesson with a fluent speaker; tape it, memorize it and practice it. These Secwepemctsín lessons will provide you with a great opportunity to grow with the language through your daily practice of using it (Ignace 2009, 31).
Table 5 – Secwepemctsín Assessment for Play-Doh Making Activity (based on ACTFL)
RATING CRITERIA
Superior Speakers at the Superior level are able to communicate with accuracy and fluency in order to participate fully and effectively in conversations on a variety of topics in formal and informal settings from both concrete and abstract perspectives. Researcher Comments: Superior level speakers will sound native-like and may demonstrate sporadic errors in complex structures, but this will not interfere with communication. Advanced Speakers at the Advanced High sublevel perform all Advanced-level tasks with High/Mid/Low linguistic ease, confidence, and competence. Researcher Comments: Increased mentoring will move the participants towards the advanced level. Advanced level speakers should demonstrate their speaking abilities by word-play (e.g. asking questions) and engage in conversation with L1 speakers, and narrate or describe in the major time frames of past, present, and future, in addition to me7 yews constructions and benefactives. Intermediate Overall, Intermediate Mid speakers are at ease when performing Intermediate- High/Mid/Low level tasks and do so with significant quantity and quality of Intermediate-level language.
Researcher Comments: Increased mentoring will move the participants towards the intermediate level. Intermediate level speakers should demonstrate their speaking abilities without referring to the “script”. Their speech is characterized by frequent pauses and self-corrections. Novice High Novice High speakers are able to express personal meaning by relying heavily on learned phrases or a recombination of these and what they hear from their interlocutor. On the other hand, since their language often consists of expansions of learned material and stock phrases, they may sometimes sound surprisingly fluent and accurate. Researcher Comments: The participants did not score at this level, due to the reliance on the “script” and lack of more advanced vocabulary and word-play, such as: me7 cícyen wel me7 pllellt (I will stir it until it gets thick), t’paq ey (it is still sticky).
50 Novice Mid Speakers at the Novice Mid sublevel communicate minimally by using a number of isolated words and memorized phrases limited by the particular context in which the language has been learned.
Researcher Comments: The participants scored at this level during the second video recorded on March 1, 2019. The “script” was posted for reference on the classroom wall. The speech was complete and the use of English was not present. The participants spoke in Secwepemctsín for an average of 17 minutes. Secwepemctsín prosody was demonstrated through accurate pronunciation and the natural and clear flow of speech. Although memorized, accurate grammar, range of vocabulary, and word-play was demonstrated. Novice Low Speakers at the Novice Low sublevel have not real functional ability and, because of their pronunciation, may be unintelligible. Researcher Comments: The participants scored at this level during the first video recorded on January 25, 2019. The “script” was not posted for reference. The speech was incomplete and the use of English was present. The speech lacked prosody, accurate use of grammar, vocabulary and word-play.
Table 4 Note: the coloured areas adapt and reference the ACTFL guideline; researcher comments relate to the final assessment for the play-doh making study with the goal of producing speech in a mini-immersion setting.
4.5.3. Word Count vs. Morpheme Count
The Secwépemc – English Dictionary (Version 3) has 7,711 word entries and was edited by the elder’s language committee over a two year period (forward), and is inclusive of all varieties of Secwepemctsín. The editors were all L1 speakers and attempted to update some of the meanings. The questions remain with determining what constitutes a “word” and how many words are needed for proficiency when Secwepemctsín is a polysynthetic language:
“For First Nations languages, it is not always easy to determine what is a ‘word’ and what is a ‘phrase’, given their productive grammar systems to build complex concepts out of smaller building blocks. However, the number of words used in everyday communication is actually far less than the number of headword dictionaries in existing First Nations language dictionaries, considering that in everyday communication, in all languages, speakers tend to rely to a good degree on high-frequency words, and only to a very small degree on unusual, specialized and rare words” (Ignace 2016, 17).
Secwepemctsín words have the potential to look very long because it is a polysynthetic language - a word could be made of up combinations of morphemes that
51 encode: subject, object, verb, quality, time, duration, benefactives, direction, etc., and at other times a word can stand alone. For example, in the play-doh making activity there is a word for “dividing up the play-doh equally”: kllew’sentwécwmentem;
klléw’s – verb: meaning to divide up equally;
-(e)nt - transitivizer
-wecw – object: meaning to each other (reciprocal);
-en – de-transitivizer;
-men – (re-)transitivizer
tem – passive form with the contextual idea of putting focus on the subject: we.
Not only is the verb kllew’sentwécwmentem marked for agreement with the grammatical subject and object in a group setting, but teaches an important concept for young children, sharing and equality. From a Secwépemc speaker perspective, the morphology of the language is an essential component when evaluating a beginner speaker’s fluency skills who began with little or no prior knowledge. Ultimately, a requirement of a second-language learner’s goal is “tuxwtuxwtsín – straightened out, correct speech” (Ignace 2016, 64) or to become an Advanced Level speaker according to the ACTFL Guidelines.
Table 6 – Word Count for Research Study
Learning Activity Topic Word Count
Circle Time Script Welcome, calendar (counting and sequencing), 120 weather, movement song, review, storytelling
Learning Centre 1 Play-doh Making 44
Learning Centre 2 Smart Board: Animals & Birds 40
Learning Centre 3 Smart Board: Animal Kooshball 10
52 Learning Centre 4 Smart Board: Animal Tracks 12
Learning Centre 5 Animal Bingo Game 25
Learning Centre 6 Animal Memory Game 41
Total Word Count: 292
Table 5 Note: word count is approximate, as participants have varying vocabulary knowledge and language skills. The word count is primarily based on the number of words in the draft “scripts” (Appendixes B-F). The researcher counted all the words (with the space as a defining point) to arrive at the total word count.
4.5.4. Prosody
Prosody is concerned with the stress and intonation of a language. Secwepemctsín is not a tonal language, therefore, the research study only addresses stress. In The Shuswap Language, Aert H. Kuipers explains Secwepemctsín words as, "a root which may be extended with affixes, mainly suffixes… large majority of the roots have the form C1VC2 or C1C2, the latter only with roots that are not found stressed" (1974, 23) and that stress, "in longer words, one syllable is marked by a not very prominent stress" (1974, 22). The stress of a word is significant for consonant reduplication, especially for the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc dialect of Secwepemctsín, "where the consonant before the stressed vowel in a word is reinserted behind the stressed vowel" (Kuipers 1974, 23; Ignace and Ignace 2017, 136). In addition to its phonological importance, consonant reduplication in the first-person singular form indicates a cultural protocol as "being little - a way to humbly and respectfully speak about oneself when addressing others… appearing small increases one's acknowledgment of the social status of the person or people being addressed and thus acknowledges them as being important" (Ignace and Ignace 2017, 136). As the participants listen to the audio recordings and spent time with L1 speakers, prosody became an important element for L2 speakers in becoming accurate speakers and sounding native-like. L1 speakers have informed me over the years that putting the stress on a different part of the word is speaking incorrectly. The research participants demonstrated enhanced pronunciation or sentence melody.
"First Nations speakers usually consider indicators of native-like fluency and high proficiency to include:
53 • intuitively accurate pronunciation and accent (phonemes or sounds, word stress, prosody or sentence melody, pitch-tone); • intuitively accurate use of grammar; • a sufficient range of vocabulary; • an ability to engage in word-play; and an ability to perform culturally important protocols (prayer, speech, story, ceremony)" (Ignace 2016, 17).
The participants shared their thoughts about not “sounding native-like” when speaking the language. They understood the importance of accurate pronunciation and pronoun-markers, however, without frequent exposure to an L1 speaker they must rely on the scripts to read and memorize the phrases. The scripts are written with all the stresses and glottal marks to enhance speaking abilities. The participants felt that the audio recordings helped their pronunciation as well.
4.6. Combining the Secwépemc Early Years Curriculum and Resources
The Secwépemc Nation is very fortunate to have a variety of language learning resources available to beginner learners. There are dictionaries, word list, curriculum packages, conversation handbooks, child-rearing handbooks, online games and archives, video, audio, multi-media, and social media pages. The language advocates and teachers of our Nation are accredited for the documentation and preservation of Secwepemctsín. The study focused on combining the following published resources:
1. Little Fawn Nursery Preschool Curriculum 2. Skeetchestn Kindergarten – Grade One Curriculum 3. Language Nest Handbook and Online Toolkit
The benefits of the LFN Preschool Curriculum rests with provided the foundation of seasonal round activities, vocabulary, learning outcomes, and hands-on resources. The benefits of the Skeetchestn curriculum rests with saving time to provide more translations into the appropriate dialect of Tk’emlúpsemc. The Language Nest Handbook provides examples and ways to explain to parents, guardians, and staff members, community members about the importance of immersion programming. The researcher adapted Unit 5 (January) to finalize the preschool language immersion session and combined the hands-on and Smart Board activities from the LFN curriculum.
54 The L1 speakers guided all translation processes to ensure the dialect of the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc people is perpetuated, enhanced and preserved. The participants are not yet fluent speakers, therefore, in weekly prep sessions, "the required vocabulary for lessons were reviewed with a fluent speaker; taped, memorized and practiced" (Ignace 2009, 31). Other techniques, such as large poster-sized "scripts" were posted in the classroom. The Skeetchestn Kindergarten - Grade 1 curriculum sections concerning "teacher talk" and daily activity dialogue (Ignace 2009, 47-59) were reviewed by L1 speakers and audio recorded. Participants received audio recordings to support individual learning styles (e.g. CDs, mp3 formats, email, or imported to devices such as iPhones). It is important to note that Secwepemtsín is not taught to young children through writing activities, but through oral language activities. However, children will be introduced to written labels in Secwepemctsín. The study focused on the preschool language immersion program and estimates a total of 70 contact hours in Secwepemctsín.
4.6.1. Basic Structure of a Preschool Language Immersion Session
Preschool Hours: 8:30-11:30
Opening (20 minutes):
• Teacher greets students in Secwepemctsín. Teacher can comment on, and make compliments about what he/she sees.
• Traditional Secwépemc Welcome Song
• Weytk, le7-en-k t’ucw? (Hello Song)
• If a child has his/her birthday: Le7 te sitq’t le k’últ-ucw – Happy Birthday to You
• Smart Board: Calendar and Weather
• Movement Songs
• Alternately, the teacher could bring an interesting item related to the theme of the month and/or the lesson of the day to catch children’s attention
• Storytelling
Morning Snack (15 minutes):
• Teachers use classroom guidance (e.g. hand washing) and food/eating words
55 Learning Centre 1 (20 minutes) – “Contextualized Comprehensible Input” (CCI)
• CCI involves practical, teacher-fronted activities with visuals, pictures and props to teach and practice small chunks of vocabulary.
• Smart Board Activity: Animals and Birds
Learning Centre 2 (20 minutes) – “Contextualized Comprehensible Input” (CCI)
• Secwepemctsín Bingo or Memory Game: Animals and Birds
Learning Centre 3 (20 minutes) – Engaging Activity
• Sensory Activity: Play-Doh Marking
The preschool room has two educators; therefore, the class can be separated into two or more groups to allow for more individualized and intensive instruction. Each educator is responsible for leading a small group through the learning centres.
Closing & Transition to Outdoors (20 minutes)
• Kukwstsétsemc (Thank you) Song
• Bathroom routine and hand washing
Outdoor Time (60 minutes)
• 30 minutes free play
• 20 minutes structured game or nature walk
Lunch Time (30 minutes)
• Teachers use classroom guidance (e.g. hand washing) and food/eating words
56 Chapter 5. Conclusion
Drawing from the Coyote and His Hosts Story, my research questions were developed to demonstrate our own way of doing things at Little Fawn Nursery. The LFN language team does not attempt to "re-invent the wheel," but adds value to our second- language teaching techniques, and more importantly, demonstrates our passion and love for Secwepemctsín. The research questions aim to the possibilities of anyone becoming a speaker (ideally a teacher) with the right teaching tools, learning environment and willingness to approach learning Secwepemctsín with an open heart and mind. I developed the research questions to include two main points: demonstrating useful and practical information for mobilizing people to learn Secwepemctsín and keeping educators engaged in teaching Secwepemctsín (e.g. overcome the barrier to fluency by staying in the language). The research questions have ethical validity "in keeping with Indigenous research paradigms that demand research to be of direct benefit to Indigenous communities, relevant and useful and grounded in an Indigenous epistemology and supported by the Elders and the community that live out this particular epistemology" (Chambers 2014, 79). Within the context of the Secwepemctsín crisis, the research questions aim to gather data about an early years program implementing a language immersion program with very few active L1 fluent speakers within the community. It is a time sensitive issue to show our people how important it is to develop effective language learning resources and second-language teaching strategies.
In conclusion, I will summarize the answers to my research questions. The benefits of building effective language learning resources that will help prepare early childhood educators to communicate entirely in Secwepemctsín begins with setting a goal to stay in the language. The multi-media resources (i.e. Smart Board and flash cards) were used to train the educators/participants about novice level question/answer sets (i.e. Berlitz Method). The L1 speakers provided language speaking mentorship and verified enhanced pronunciation. This, in turn, helped to increase the participant’s confidence level. The research study proved how to design language-learning resources in a community of few speakers by working with L1 speakers to develop authentic resources, elicit appropriate information, produce audio recordings. The classroom activities proved to keep young children engaged in play-doh making for 17 minutes, which also addresses the Communicative-Experiential approach for second language
57 learning. “In order to reconcile the goal of grammatical and phonological accuracy with the communicative approach to language teaching, the curriculum for Kindergarten- Grade 1 Secwepemctsin laid out in this adopts a strategy whereby grammatical and phonological competence are taught through approaches which focus on interaction and communication, as well, as culturally appropriate content, and the application of language skills in authentic settings (ex. practicing and encouraging use of the language with speakers)” (Ignace 2009, 15). LFN lacked a clear plan of action for addressing the proficiency levels of the educators. The research proved the value of the Skeetchestn curriculum, along with second language teaching methods for young children by demonstrating the Berlitz Method in the multi-media resources and scripts, and the TPR Method in the play-doh making activity. Overall, the participants achieved the language immersion goal during the preschool session.
5.1. Structural Support Systems
Explaining how to facilitate the operation of Indigenous language immersion will add to the story about Secwépemc early years programming. Indigenous scholars bring our attention to reclaiming language, qualitative research methodologies in initiating and maintaining language nest programs, importance of Indigenous ideology and pedagogy, historical triangulation through the eyes and words of our elders, and ultimately dispelled all the negative and damaging myths about our heritage languages. This study concludes with LFN’s way of doing things.
5.1.1. Administration
The LFN Administrator plays an essential role in the successful leadership and management of a Secwépemc early years language immersion program by setting a good example for the language team by being a language speaker. Theoretical concepts of second language acquisition, holistic development, program development, and administrative best practices are building blocks for early childhood education administration. Further success factors of the LFN Administrator include: self-direction, energetic, flexible, open-minded, creative, responsible, detail-oriented, organized, solution focused, analytical, strong communication and interpersonal skills, compassionate and committed to making a difference in the lives of children and their
58 families, and ultimately the love and passion to revitalize and reclaim Secwepemctsín. The LFN Administrator is accountable in leading the curriculum design, supports the efforts of the educators and most importantly is a certified and experienced Secwepemctsín teacher and speaker. Other factors of language immersion program administration include:
• frontline efforts – continuously networking and recruiting qualified staff vested in the community’s language reclamation goal; financial stability by offering full-time employment will help educators focus on language mentoring strategies; • community efforts – collaborating with other departments to promote program; • political efforts – information sharing to access external funding and updates; community leaders who advocate at provincial and national levels
5.1.2. Licensing
The LFN facility is a provincially and federally licensed early years program for children 0 – 5 year old children. Provincially, LFN hosts a licensed group child care program for children under 36 months old (infant and toddler room) and a 30 month old to school age (3-5 room) program. Federally, LFN is band-operated K4 program for children who are registered Indians and live on-reserve. Licensed programs offer safety and financial stability. LFN has a positive and collaborative relationship with the Licensing Officers. LFN collaborates with the First Nations Health Authority and Indigenous Services Canada to complete annual inspections.
A licensed program is an important aspect from an administrative and parent perspective. Through licensing, LFN receives more support and better access to funding from the provincial and federal government. Parents can access subsidized government funding to help offset child care fees. Also, a licensed program adds credibility and parents feel more at ease sending their child to LFN. A licensed program can maintain consistent enrolment, which helps the financial sustainability.
5.1.3. Funding
The amount of funding required depends on the nature of the program. Through collaborative financial management and effective administration, LFN is a self-sustaining program and accesses the following sources of external revenue:
59 • Ministry of Children and Family Development: Affordable Child Care Benefit Program, Child Care Operating Fund, Child Care Fee Reduction Initiative, Early Childhood Wage Enhancement Program • Indigenous Services Canada: Tripartite Education Framework Agreement • First Nations Schools Association and First Nations Education Steering Committee: Special Education Program, Language and Culture Program • Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training: First Nations and Inuit Child Care Initiative • First Peoples Cultural Council: Language Nest Program • Child care and tuition fees paid by parents
Due to the lack of L1 speakers, the TteS community plans to increase fluency skills with existing LFN educators. The funding sustains essential program operations: space, staff, supplies, and food. The objective of language and culture funding allows the early years program to include L1 speakers and cultural experts.
5.1.4. Resource development
Similar to other early years programs, LFN lacks age appropriate resources in Secwepemctsín. LFN continuously develops multi-media resources and resource kits. A printer and laminator are essential for developing Secwepemctsín resources, such as books, audio books, song charts, and games. Smart Board technology is used to develop innovative and interactive activities for children, which guides the educators through curriculum objectives. Video and audio recordings are linked to the Smart Board, which also follows the seasonal curriculum plan. The Smart Board keeps the children engaged with the language program while having fun. A Secwepemctsín listening centre utilizes the First Voices Kids and Chief Atahm School Games websites. The Smart Board system helps the LFN Administrator continually gauge an educator’s knowledge about Secwepemctsín, included pronunciation. If the LFN Administrator can provide further mentorship to enhance an educator’s speaking abilities. The Smart Board is a fun and interactive assessment tool for the children, as well. It provides ways to prompt language interactions with children. They love watching and singing along with Kyé7e (grandmother puppet) and their teachers during the short video clips.
60 5.1.5. Language Teacher Training
LFN proactively implemented an “on the job” language mentoring program as a high priority language revitalization initiative. The mentoring program is embedded in program and job descriptions; therefore, all educators and assistants are required to participate in “on the job” language mentoring plan. Teacher training is achieved through the multi-faceted layers, such as:
• teaching beginners how to produce speech through modeling pronunciation every day • awareness of second-language teaching strategies and available resources • ownership of knowledge transfer through development of resource kits • sponsoring accredited language courses • networking with other language teachers by attending workshops/conferences • encouragement to teach what you learn • praise and acknowledgement for achieving milestones • supporting individual language learning plans
5.1.6. Recommendations for Little Fawn Nursery
LFN achieved a significant goal by recruiting and employing dedicated and hard- working educators ready to learn to speak Secwepemctsín. It is a difficult task to learn Secwepemctsín. Some short-term goals include: develop a mentor-apprentice model work plan for each activity room that demonstrates clear objectives and milestones, develop an employee incentive program to learn to speak the language, access more L1 speakers to provide feedback about speaking abilities, and seek out support systems for an annual staff retreat to rejuvenate staff and to revisit program goals, objectives – staying connected to the Vision. Long-term goals include: design and host a language immersion early years conference to share and network, collaborate with community language program planning; develop a language apprentice incentive program to recruit young people, and find innovative ways to go on field trips for harvesting food and gathering medicines. Ultimately, LFN hopes to change the language shift from teaching isolated words (e.g. red, blue, green) to full immersion by conversing with the children in full sentences (e.g. that is a red flower).
61 5.2. Way Forward – Setting up the Mentor-Apprentice Program Specific to LFN
The FPCC Mentor-Apprentice Program (MAP) planning documents will be adapted and used to set a schedule and language goals for the next year. Part of the mentor program will set up milestones for educators to focus on, for example, the basic word list, vocabulary word count and specific terminology for the nurturing and care taking of young children. An assessment of the apprentice team will be formulated by adapting the MAP panel evaluation document (see Appendix H). LFN will invite existing L1 or advanced speakers to conduct the assessment.
Table 7 – Mentor-Apprentice Schedule Example
May, June & July Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Total Hours Week 1 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 10
Week 2 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 10
Week 3 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 10
Week 4 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 8:30-10:30 10
TOTAL HOURS PER MONTH: 40
Table 7 – Mentor-Apprentice Program Work Plan Example Work Plan: Language Focus: Number of Hours: What activities will you do What language will you learn from How many hrs will together to accomplish your each activity? i.e. words, phrases, you spend on each language learning goals? language skills etc. activity? Prepare Morning Snack Cooking and Kitchen 8:30-9:00
Serve Morning Snack Food and Eating 9:00-9:30
62 Transition to Bathroom Routine Bathroom and Hygiene 9:30-9:45
Morning Circle Time Drumming, Singing and Movement 9:45-10:00 Songs
Transition to Outside Time Clothing 10:00-10:30
5.2.1. Personal Reflections
The KIRS took away the language from many Secwépemc families by giving parents no other option. Our Secwépemc social and family ways of knowing faded away with our language. At the forefront, the survival of the Secwépemc language depends on each member of the community. Advancements for our languages occur at the national and international level, such as: the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed 2019 as the International Year of Indigenous Languages and Bill C-91, an Act respecting Indigenous Languages (tabled on February 5, 2019). By looking to the future and to give hope to the next generations, LFN plans to keep renewing the language for the TteS community by training educators to become confident speakers and role models. With these advancements and plans in mind, I have come full circle in my research - my mother’s language (my language) was taken from her at KIRS and now my mother’s daughter (me) is leading the language immersion early years program by giving young children their basic human right: to hear, speak, sing, dance and play in Secwepemctsín.
More importantly, the research study continues to discredit the "myth" that children cannot learn more than one language at a time. The residential school authorities told Secwépemc parents that children only needed to know English to get a job and to be a successful member of society. In the attempts to adapt and conform to the imposed structures of the flood of settlers in the late 1800s and early 1900s, Secwépemc parents (just like any other parent of any culture) wanted their child to succeed. Now, the language advocates are faced with raising awareness about
63 language learning for the early years and demonstrating how bi-lingual or multi-lingual children have increased cognitive abilities and higher success rates. This reminds me of the stories I heard from Secwépemc elders; stories about their parents and grandparents speaking the languages of our neighboring Nations: Nɬeʔkepmxcín (Thompson), St'at'imcets (Lillooet) and Nsilxcín (Colville-Okanagan) and the trade language called Chinook.
As I draw this research to a close, my thoughts and feelings are with my two younger children. Now, instead of saying, “Just a minute,” “Mommy just has to write this…”, or “I am almost done,” I can focus on immersing my children and grandson in Secwepemctsín. My youngest son is five years old and I have noticed his Secwepemctsín knowledge deteriorate over the last two years while I have been studying and working. When faced with the responsibility of becoming a Secwépemc researcher through this master of arts program, my studies consumed my energy and focus. I had to distance myself from family, friends, and leisure interests. I realize that Secwepemctsín research will never be finished, but I cannot wait to reconnect with my kw’séltkten (family).
This journey has taught me a lot about my language and has given me a whole new way of planning the next phase of language retention strategies for my language career as a teacher or mentor, and for my home life. Personally, I am now inspired by Loren Bommelyn:
“He managed his learning program by asking the elders how to say things, by then practicing those things with the elders and on his own, and later by the ingenious method of deciding to say everything in Tolowa before saying it in English, no matter who he was talking to. This way he both practiced his language extensively and also found out what he did not know yet; he would then ask the elders when next he was with them… And the end result was that he has become a fully fluent speaker-one a good 50 years younger than any other fluent speaker of Tolowa” (Hinton 2001, 183).
Finally, and foremost, I am inspired by the Secwépemc monolingual speakers for holding onto the language and passing on linguistic knowledge to their children and grandchildren, like Loretta and Bernadette.
64 References
ACTFL - American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Language. 2012. "Performance Descriptors for Language Learners." Alexandria, VA.
ACTFL – American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Language. 2012. “Proficiency Guidelines.” Alexandria, VA.
Arnouse, Jessica. 2019. "Bernadette Jules Biography." Personal Interview.
Billy, Janice. D. 2013. "Little Fawn Nursery Curriculum." Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc.
Billy, Janice. D. 2013. "Little Fawn Nursery Secwepemctsín 50% Immersion Program Report: Tk’emlúps." Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc.
Chambers, Natalie A. 2014. "They All Talk Okanagan and I Know What They Are Saying. Language Nests in The Early Years: Insights, Challenges, And Promising Practices." Doctoral Thesis. University of British Columbia.
Elder's Language Committee and Language Advisory Committee. 2001. "English- Secwépemc Dictionary - Version 3." Secwépemc Cultural Education Society.
Elder's Language Committee and Language Advisory Committee. 2001. "Secwépemc- English Dictionary - Version 3." Secwépemc Cultural Education Society.
First Nations Health Authority. "Early Childhood Development." Accessed Web. 12 Jan. 2019.
First Peoples Cultural Council. 2014. "Language Nest Handbook for British Columbia First Nations Communities." First Peoples Cultural Foundation.
First Peoples Cultural Council. 2018. "Report on the Status of B.C. First Nations Languages." First Peoples Cultural Foundation.
First Peoples Cultural Council. "Secwépemc for Kids." First Voices, 2000-2019. Web. 12 Jan. 2019.
Green, Jeremy Tehota'kerá:tonh. 2017. "Pathways to Creating Onkwehonwehnéha Speakers at Six Nations of The Grand River Territory." Six Nations Polytechnic.
Hinton, Leanne and Kenneth Hale. 2001. "Teaching Methods." The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Hinton, Leanne. 2001. "Teaching Methods." The Green Book of Language Revitalization." Academic Press.
65 Ignace, Marianne. 2016. "First Nations Language Curriculum Building Guide: British Columbia Kindergarten - Gr. 12." First Nations Education Steering Committee and First Nations Schools Association.
Ignace, Marianne. "L2 Acquisition." Summer Term 2018. PowerPoint Presentation.
Ignace, Marianne. 2009. "Secwepemctsín Kindergarten - Grade 1 Curriculum." Skeetchestn Community School.
Ignace, Marianne and Ronald E. Ignace. 2017. "Secwépemc People, Land, and Laws - Yerí7 re Stsq̓ ey̓ s-kucw." McGill-Queen's University Press.
Jet Pack Learning. 2018. "Chief Atahm School Game Zone." Accessed 12 Jan. 2019.
Krashen, Stephen D. 1982. "Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition." Pergamon Press Inc.
Kuipers, Aert H. 1974. "The Shuswap Language: Grammar, Texts, Dictionary." University of Leiden. Mouton: The Hague - Paris.
Kuipers, Aert H. 1975. "A Classified English-Shuswap Word-List." Peter de Ridder Press.
Lai, I-Ju Sandra and Marianne Ignace. 1998. "A Preliminary Analysis of Secwépemc Language Acquisition by a Young Child." Working Papers in Linguistics (UBCWPL) & Occasional Papers in Linguistics (UBCOPL).
McIvor, Onowa. 2004. "Building The Nests: Language Revitalization in Canada Through Early Childhood Immersion Programs." Master of Arts Thesis. University of Victoria.
McIvor, Dr. Onowa and Dr. Peter Jacobs. 2016. "Netolnew: Language Learning Assessment Tool." University of Victoria. V.3.1.
Michel, Kathryn A. 2018. "Tricksters Path to Language Transformation: Stories of Secwepemc Immersion from Chief Atahm School." Doctoral Thesis. University of British Columbia. 2012. Open Collections: https://open.library.ubc.ca/ Accessed: 12. Nov. 2018.
O’Grady, W. & J. Archibald. 2012. "Contemporary Linguistic Analysis." Pearson.
"Our Land." Tk’emlúps. 2018. www.tkemlups.ca. Accessed 11. Nov. 2018.
Pine, Aidan. 2008. "Secwépemc." First Peoples' Heritage Language and Culture Council, 2017. Version 2.0.1. First Voices. https://itunes.apple.com/app/secwepemc/id594400637?mt=8.
66 Province of British Columbia. "British Columbia Early Years Framework." Ministry of Health and Ministry of Children and Family Development.
Secwépemc Language Curriculum Committee. 1996. “Cuy̓ e Secwepemctsném-kt. Secwépemc Language Package for Grades 11/12 Beginners” Secwépemc Cultural Education Society.
Seymour, Colleen. 2018. "Loretta Seymour Biography." Personal Interview.
Tk'emlúps Language Committee. 2010. "Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc Language Survey." Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc.
Tk’emlúpsemc Native Language Program. 2005. “Tk’emlúpsemc (KIB) Native Language Program: History Theme: Place Names” Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc.
Twitchell, X'unei Lance. 2016. "Increasing Adult Fluency in the Tlingit Language." Indigenous Language and Culture Education Foundations.
Vanegas, Carmen. 2008. "Similarities and Differences Between Second Language Acquisition." PBWorks. Accessed 2 Feb. 2019, multilingualism.pbworks.com/w/page/21913433/Similarities%20and%20Differenc es%20between%20First%20and%20Second%20Language%20Acquisition
Wikipedia contributors. 2018. "Methodology." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Accessed. 2 Jan. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_grammar.
Wikipedia contributors. 2019. "Universal Grammar." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Accessed. 2 Feb. 2019.
67 Appendix A.
Classroom Talk Assessment
Secwepemctsín English No SW Yes Weytk. Hello (to one). Weytkp. Hello (to many). Pútucw. Good bye (to one). Pútucwiye. Good bye (to many). Kukwstsétsemc. Thank you. Lé7-en-k t̓ucw? How are you? (to one) Mé7e, lél7e-ken. Yes, I am fine. Ta7a. Ta7 ken slel7e. No, I am not fine. Yerí7 re sle7s. That’s good. Mé7e Yes Tá7a No Cuy̓ e kuk̓ uwétem-kt Let’s take a walk Swéti7 ke7 skwest? What is your name? Rhonda ren skwekwst. My name is Rhonda. Telhé7e k st'7ékucw? Where do you come from? Te Tk’emlúps re st'7e7kwen. I come from Kamloops. Emút-ce. Sit down (to one). Emút-cwiye. Sit down (to many). Lléqel-cwiye. Climb up and sit down (to many) Ts’elíl-ce. Stand up (to one). Ts’elíl-cwiye. Stand up (to many). Élk̓ wente. Put it away (to one). Élk̓ wént-iye. Put it away (to many). k'elél̓ nem-ce. Listen (one person). k'elél̓ nem-cwiye. Listen everyone. Knúcwente. Help him/her. Knúncwentsme. Help me! Élkst-ce. Work! (to one) Élkst-cwiye. You work! (to many) Q̓ iyem-ce Write! Tsúnte. Tell him/her. Séwente. Ask him/ her.
Language for introducing new words or phrases:
Secwepemctsín English No SW Yes Xíllte cuy̓ tsem. Now, do it again! (to one) Xilltcwiye cuy̓ tsem. Now, do it again! (to many) Tsúnte cuy̓ tsem. Say it again! (to one) Tsúntiye cuy̓ tsem. Say it again! (to many) Me7 setsínem-kt cú7tsem. We’re going to repeat the song. Tsut-ce cú7tsem. Tell/say (it) again. Tsútsentsme cuy̓ tsem yerí7 te Tell me that word again. sqweqwlut.
68 Me7 xílltem cú7tsem ts̓ ílem le- We’ll repeat what we did péxyewtes. yesterday. Kenkentsínce. Speak slowly (to one)! Kenkentsíncwiye. Speak slowly (to many)! Yutsínem-ce. Say it loud (to one)! Yutsínem-cwiye. Say it loud (to many)!
Commands: Secwepemctsín English No SW Yes Cuy̓ e setsínem-kt! Let’s sing. Cuy̓ e siséyse-kt! Let’s play. Cuy̓ e Secwepemctsném-kt! Let’s speak Secwepemctsín. Me7 xepqenwéllen-kt es We’re going to learn Secwepemctsném-kt! Secwepemctsín. Cuy̓ me7 Secwepemctsném-kt! Let’s get started with Secwepemctsín! Xwéntes ke7s Secwepemctsnem! Quick, say it in Shuswap! Tsúnte yerí7 ne Secwepemctsín! Say that in Shuswap! Yerí7 me7 re stsukws. Let’s finish up! That is the end! Yerí7 me7 re swi7-kt. Let’s finish up now!
Contextualized Comprehensible Input: Secwepemctsín English No SW Yes Yen ye7éne re kenkéknem? Is it a black bear? W7ec-en k íllenes re Maya? Is Maya eating? T’hé7en k w7ecwes re kenkéknem? Where is the black bear? Yihé7en p’ecws xyums? Which one is bigger? Yihé7en k p̓ ecws k̓ woyí7eses? Which one is smaller? T’hé7en re leputey sténes? Where is the item [bottle]?
69 Appendix B.
Script: Circle Time Routine
Opening:
Weytkp stsmém’elt! (Hello children)
John, le7-en-k t’ucw? (John, how are you?)
Children Respond: Mé7e, léle7-ken. Tá7a, ta7 ken sléle7. (Good. Not good.)
Ella, xwexwistéten re7 stektíts’e7. (Ella, I like your shirt.)
Cuy’, me7 setsínem-kt Tsecmíntl-men Ren Kw’séltkten te Setsíntens. (Let’s all sing now: The Traditional Welcome Song)
Yerí7 re skukwstsétselp! Le7 te setsínem! (Thank you all very much, very good singing.)
Calendar/Month:
Cuy’, me7 emétentem-kt pyin te mégcen… Pelltsípwen’ten. (Let’s all pronounce the month.)
Stém’i pyin te mégcen? Pelltsípwen’ten. (What month is it now? February.)
John, estkenstékee7 Pelltsípwen’ten. (John touches the Smart Board and the audio clip says Pelltsípwen’ten)
Stém’i pyin te mégcen, John? (What month is it, John? John answers Pelltsípwen’ten)
Mé7e, Pelltsípwen’ten. (Yes, February.)
Nek’ú7 te Xetspésq’t/Days of the Week:
Cuy’, me7 emétentem-kt nek’ú7 te xetspésq’t. Xetspésq’t, Nekw’ésq’t, Selésq’t, Kellésq’t, Mesésq’t, Tsilkstésq’t, Teq’mekstésq’t. (Let’s all pronounce the days of the week: Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday.)
Cuy’ me7 setsínem-kt Nekw’ú7 te Xetspésq’t te Setsíntens! (Let’s all sing: Days of the Week Song)
Sitq’t/Day:
Cuy’, me7 xyénem-kt re sitq’t. Nek’ú7, seséle, kélles, mus, etc. (Let’s all count the days. One, two, three, four, etc.)
Nek’ú7 pyin te sitq’t te Pelltsípwen’ten re mégcen. (Today is the first day of February.)
70 Ye7éne Nek’ú7 pyin te sitq’t. Q’iyentéke7 “nek’ú7”. (Here is the number one. Write it.)
Ec Kénmes re Sk’empéllcw/Weather:
Cuy’, me7 emétentem-kt ec kénmes re sk’empéllcw. (Let’s all pronounce the weather outside.)
W7ec k kénmes re tmicw? (What is the weather like today?)
Ts’ellt re tmicw. (It is cold.)
Cuy’, me7 setsínem-kt: Ts’ellt-en pyin? Ts’ellt-en pyin? Mé7e, mé7e, ts’ellt pyin. (Let’s all sing: Is it cold today? Is it cold today? Yes, yes, it is cold today.)
Traditional Movement Song:
Cuy’, me7 setsínem-kt: Re Q’eyíle7tcwe te Setsíntens. (Let’s all sing: Pinto Pony Song.)
Contemporary Movement Song:
Cuy’, me7 setsínem-kt: Re Sk’épqen, Tk’méne te Setsíntens. (Let’s all sing: Head and Shoulders Song.)
Sts’elíl’-cwiye… nek’ú7, seséle, kélles: sk’épqen, tk’méne, sk’épqen, tk’méne, sk’méw’istcen, sk’méw’istcen ell re7 sqw’ext, ell re7 sqw’ext. (Everyone stand up. One, two, three: head, shoulder, head, shoulder, knee, knee, and your foot, and your foot.)
Storytelling:
Pyin me7 re slexéy’ectlmen te stseptékwlentem: Re Sqlew7úw’I ell Re Skúp7pecen. (Now I will tell you the Beaver and Porcupine Legend.)
Smart Board Transition Game:
Cuy’, me7 séyse-kt ne xexé7 te q’iyél’tcwten. (Let’s all play on the Smart Board.)
71 Appendix C.
Script: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine
1st Person Form
Me7 Secwepemctsném-kt:
1. Me7 kúk’lem-ken te semlóle7cw te syéksten.
2. Xetéqs, me7 emémten-ken xwexwéyt te stem ne7élye.
3. Ye7éne re tseck̓ púcw, re st̓ címen, re cllúqwmen̓ , re peqpíq, re qwtell, re melmálqwten, re megmétkwe, re lesél.
4. Me7 kwékwen tek seléwll te cllúqwmen̓ tek peqpíq. Ctétk̓ en ne tseck̓ púcw.
5. Me7 kwékwen tek ¾ te cllúqwmen̓ tek lesél. Ctétk̓ en ne tseck̓ púcw.
6. Me7 kwékwen tek meséke7 te k̓ woyí7ese te st̓ címen tek tartar te met̓ ke7. Me7 cícyen. (Tntéke7 re tseck̓ púcw ne7élye.)
7. Me7 kwékwen tek seléwll te cllúqwmen̓ tek megmétkwe. Ctétk̓ en ne tseck̓ púcw.
8. Me7 kwékwen tek seléke7 te xyum te st̓ címen tek qwtell. Ctétk̓ en ne tseck̓ púcw. Me7 cícyen. (Stém̓ i es qwenénen-kt te melmálqwem?)
9. Me7 ctétk̓ en re megmégtkwe. Me7 cícyen wel me7 pllellt.
10. Me7 kllew̓ smentwécwmentem.
11. Me7 pípts̓ en.
12. Me7 7íp’en.
13. Tntéke7 ne qw7é7p.
72 Appendix D.
Script: Making Play-Doh TPR Routine
2nd Person Form
Me7 Secwepemctsném-kt:
1. Me7 k’úlem-k te semlóle7cw te syéksten.
2. Xetéqs, me7 emétentem-k xwexwéyt te stem ne7élye.
3. Ye7éne re tseck̓ púcw, re st̓ címen, re cllúqwmen̓ , re peqpíq, re qwtell, re melmálqwten, re megmétkwe, re lesél.
4. Me7 kwenc tek seléwll te cllúqwmen̓ tek peqpíq. Cték̓ enc ne tseck̓ púcw.
5. Me7 kwenc tek ¾ te cllúqwmen̓ tek lesél. Cték̓ enc ne tseck̓ púcw.
6. Me7 kwenc tek meséke7 te k̓ woyí7ese te st̓ címen tek tartar te met̓ ke7. Me7 cíyenc. (Tntéke7 re tseck̓ púcw ne7élye.)
7. Me7 kwenc tek seléwll te cllúqwmen̓ tek megmétkwe. Cték̓ enc ne tseck̓ púcw.
8. Me7 kwenc tek seléke7 te xyum te st̓ címen tek qwtell. Cték̓ enc ne tseck̓ púcw. Me7 cíyenc. (Stém̓ i es qwenénen-kt te melmálqwem?)
9. Me7 cték’enc re megmégtkwe. Me7 cíyenc wel me7 pllellt.
10. Me7 kllew̓ smentwécwmentem.
11. Me7 píts̓ enc.
12. Me7 íp’enc.
13. Tntéke7 ne qw7é7p.
73 Appendix E.
Script: Secwepemctsin Bingo Game
Tmesméscen’ te Bingo
Cuy’ me7 séyse-kt te Tmesméscen’ te Bingo
Tskwénte re7 ts’elcwílep. Emút-ce.
Kwé7e, ye7éne re7 stsq’ey.
Swetí7 pell [kenkéknem]?
Tsut-ce: Entsétswe7 pell [kenkéknem]-ken.
Tsut-ce: Ta7 entsétswe7 ta7 pell [kenkéknem]-ken.
T’cúcem-ken!
Yerí7 re stsukws!
Elkw’énte xwexwéyt te stem.
74 Appendix F.
Script: Secwepemctsin Memory Game
Llekwmíntem te Lekáltem:
Cuy’, me7 séyse-kt te llekwmíntem te lekáltem.
Tskwénte re7 ts’elcwílep. Emút-ce.
Me7 cwelpentéc tsukw nek’ú7… me7 yews es cwelpentéc nek’ú7 cú7tsem.
Yen ri7 re sts’ilemstwécw?
Mé7e, re ntsétswe7 kwenwéw’en ts’ilemstwecw.
Tá7a, ta7 k sts’ilemstwécw.
E ts’ilemstwécw, me7 yews es tntec ne7élye.
Xyénte. Kw’inc es ts’ilemstwécw?
T’cum re ____Jessica___.
Yerí7 re stsukws!
Yerí7 re swi7-kt!
Elkw’énte xwexwéyt te stem.
75 Appendix G.
Weekly Lesson Plan Template
CIRCLE TIME 8:30-9:00 CENTRE 1: 9:20-9:40 CENTRE 2: 9:40-10:00 CENTRE 3: 10:00-10:20 SENSORY/CRAFTS SMART BOARD GAME WELCOME SONG
CALENDAR/WEATHER
t ̓ s q
é MOVEMENT SONGS w ̓ SMART BOARD ACTIVITY Ne k
STORY
WELCOME SONG
CALENDAR/WEATHER
t
̓ MOVEMENT SONGS
Sel é s q SMART BOARD ACTIVITY
STORY WELCOME SONG
CALENDAR/WEATHER
t ̓ MOVEMENT SONGS
Kell é s q SMART BOARD ACTIVITY
STORY WELCOME SONG
CALENDAR/WEATHER
t ̓ MOVEMENT SONGS
Mes é s q SMART BOARD ACTIVITY
STORY WELCOME SONG
t CALENDAR/WEATHER ̓
é s q MOVEMENT SONGS
Tsilkst SMART BOARD ACTIVITY
STORY
76 Appendix H.
Panel Evaluation Form
Apprentice Speaking Evaluation by Panel of Speakers3
TO BE COMPLETED BY PANEL OF SPEAKERS AFTER EACH 100 HOURS Send to: FPCC Language Programs by email, mail or FAX (250) 652-5953.
Name of Apprentice: ______Date of Evaluation: ______
Panel Evaluation (check one): __#1 (100 hrs) ___ # 2 (200 hrs) ___ #3 (300 hrs)
Names of Panel Speakers (evaluators): ______
How did the Apprentice demonstrate his/her language fluency? (conversation, storytelling etc.)
Based on the Apprentice’s language learning goals, please provide some comments on the Apprentice’s level of fluency and his/her progress in the program.
What do you recommend the Apprentice work on for the next 100hrs.? (i.e. pronunciation of certain sounds, word endings etc.)
The evaluation sessions are an opportunity to discuss goals and share ideas for the next 100hrs. If you have suggestions for topics or activities, please share them with the Mentor-Apprentice team. Your time, support and expertise are greatly appreciated!
Please initial: Mentor ______Speakers (Evaluators) ______
3 First Peoples Cultural Council, Mentor-Apprentice Program
77